London Mayor Ken Livingstone today announced a revamp of the congestion charge. The firebrand politician has more than tripled the cost to £25 for the biggest polluters. However, it’s great news for motorists with the cleanest vehicles, allowing all cars in tax band A and B free entry. What do you think of the policy?
At the moment 17 per cent of the cars which drive in the congestion charge will face the new £25 fee, while just two per cent will be exempt. Sounds like a recipe for reduced congestion on the face of things.
But it’s possible many of those driving the highest emitting cars can afford the increase, while motorists who have small cars and don’t currently drive into the city centre will now use the law change to avoid public transport. Could congestion get worse now there’s no fee for greener cars?
Does this turn the current system into an emissions charge rather than a congestion charge? With this latest development will other cities such as Manchester move forward with their plans to introduce such schemes?
Give us your views.
Auto Trader Blog RSS Feed
22 Comments
February 12, 2008 at 3:55 pm
If every car in the UK was banned, the worlds CO2 levels will be back up to the same pre-ban level within 6 weeks.
Restricting 2% of cars in London is a much good as a rats fart in a hurricane. So this is just an envy tax.
February 12, 2008 at 4:24 pm
Thank god I started working on my UK exit plan when I did. Running my own business is similar to operating with a noose around my neck. The circle is forever tightening and what I realise from travelling is that comfort, prosperity and fulfilment can be found about 3500 miles away.
February 12, 2008 at 8:41 pm
So at last Red Ken admits it.
Its not a congestion charge its a just another vehicle tax.
Whats next, a lower charge for cars that are red?
February 12, 2008 at 10:45 pm
Stupid little man
I hope this gets him thrown out
of he goes ahead with this charge I shall simply buy an exempt car keep my Porsche for decent trips and drive inside the congestion charge even more making the congestion even worse, this is no longer a congestion charge but a tax on those who can afford better, its a tax against those who work hard and want to enjoy the fruits of their labours
stupid little man
lets get rid of him, Please!
February 12, 2008 at 11:30 pm
totally agree with the charge, london is just a smog filled dump, don`t know why anyone wants to go there anyway its a health hazard. having said that it won`t stop the toffs in the posh tractors will it.
February 13, 2008 at 11:11 am
So Leslie you are going to drive more and achieve what?
You need to get a job that keeps you busier and gives you less time to be cruising around london during congestion charging time.
Also do we really need to be breathing in huge volumes of traffic fumes at every moment of the day.
February 13, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Business will suffer in the short term, but eventually what will happen is that the people affected will find a way to pass on the costs to consumers, and so ultimately everyone will suffer.
Even if its just employees right now, they will all be looking for alternatives, and many will argue for a pay rise on the basis of increasing costs of living, including these charges.
Many people I know simply refuse to go into London anyway. You cant get out of London late at night due to poor infrastructure that closes down too early.
And the costs of everything in London is way ti high. When people say “Rip off Britain”, you need to double that when talking about London.
And here we have a bureaucrat who wants to increases costs again. Has the world gone mad?
February 13, 2008 at 1:24 pm
Let’s have the government subsidise the conversion of all our vehicles to run on water. Then we could all be green and not pay a bean back to the government in petrol tax and congestion/emmission charges. Everyone’s a winner! Or then again, maybe they’d think of some other way to make up the income loss. Maybe a heavy breathing tax to reduce emmissions?
February 13, 2008 at 2:16 pm
A very expensive way of achieving very little.
TFi’s own figures show that almost all their income is achieved through fines. The scheme has been a financial disaster generating zero cash for public transport.
Raising the CC is about covering up this shortfall, now that they have gone through the cost and political pain of introducing it they cannot let it fail regardless of cost.
Pretending that it’s to improve our environment is pathetic and is insulting to the green movement.
Remember the CC was originally touted as a green measure, well TFi’s own figures state it has had no impact on pollution; this is primarily because the wind doesn’t know about the zone.
We need to tackle the problem Ken not just raise the charge to justify a badly thought out scheme.
February 13, 2008 at 4:11 pm
I wish They Would Get rid of some of the filthy diesel 40 year old buses and stinking taxis that are licensed by the metropoltitan police and transport for london before the poor motorist is yet again picked upon by the likes of ken livingstone and his cronies !!!
Yours faithfully
Michael Hayes
February 14, 2008 at 1:48 am
He says that ‘Chelsea tractors’ are not needed? Well, lets give a real life example. We need a family car that doubles as a car to take the dog to the park every morning (its a big German Shepherd, big..). We have a budget of 16K. So… we need a big car. Options (used: Toureg, ML290 (old), Volvo (the big one), Dodge Nitro and a few other big cars. All of these classify under the 25 pound a day zone. It would go into the zone lets say 4 times a week, and thats morle like 6 times. Thats 100 pounds. 3000 odd pounds a year. Alot of money.
Who is Ken Livingstone kidding? Is he in a dilusional world where he thinks he’ll get voted in again? Actually he may be, and you know why? He is pro-palastine. Due to the influx of Arabs, he will be voted.
To all the people who are like ‘Good riddens posh people’ well, as mentioned above, cars that go into the 25 pouns a day do not have to be very expensive, and old cars will suffure alot as they lack proper catylisct converters etc.
Edited by moderator. No swearing please.
February 14, 2008 at 7:44 pm
all these congestion chargers are a way 2 get money
i think we shud warm up the country depresion would decline nd we’d get better fruit!
Edited by moderator. No swearing please.
February 18, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Roberto Maietta ..You’re right there with your comments. Britain is a rip off esp in London, however I visited London last week with the family for 4 days. We took the train from Plymouth £64 for a family of 4, used the underground (lots) cost £40. Sooo cheap. Why would anyone want to drive a car in London anyway.
More the problem is it will creat a two tier transport system, the well off driving expensive guzzling cars and polluting and the rest of us on public transport saving the planet. Generally the well of don’t care for the environment when it hurts. to quote a BMW exec “people go to Cocktail parties talk all night about the enviroment then jump in the X5 to go home”.
I really think cars over 200g/km should be banned in any city centre in the UK along with banning single occupany in any city centre Chauffers shoulfd NOT be included.
Nuff said.
February 19, 2008 at 11:59 pm
You say that the Skoda fabia will be exempt from the charge, what about all Skodas my superb is used as a taxi and it was smoke tested from new and it has always been 30% below what the government says it should be but i still have to pay £130 in road tax the same as the fabia.
nearly every modern diesel car made should be exempt from the charges as they are cleaner and greener than there petrol counterparts so why are we being hammered at the pumps
February 25, 2008 at 4:02 am
Taxes and laws like these are simply rubbish, here in São Paulo, BR, a few years ago they introduced a law which consists in banning cars circulation based on their license plate last numbers, for example, 1 and 2 on monday, 3 and 4 in tuesday, and so on.
if you drive around with you car in those “banned” days they stick you a fine
The purpose was reducing pollution but the effect was the inverse with people buying a second car, registering with a different last number plate (ex. my car plate ends in 1, so I buy another and license it with the plate ending in 5) and so more cars in traffic is the result
March 10, 2008 at 5:38 pm
I have a conservitive 2 litre family estate car and I will have to pay the £25 pounds. Next time I’ll make sure I get a X5 with some serious CO2 emissions
March 11, 2008 at 1:07 pm
i dont think that congestion is that bad,i drive a 500 litre tank and i dont have to pay anything.
March 16, 2008 at 10:03 am
Livingstone is just making it up as he goes along and Brown and Darling are even worse once again the good old motorist is being wrung out like a damp cloth to get the last few drips, because of Labours bungling incompetence we are now all left to pick up the bill for their reckless spending on hairbrained schemes, Who sold off our gold reserves when the price was rock bottom? good old Gordon Brown Gold is now $1000 an ounce need i say more Fiscal genius? my foot
April 3, 2008 at 10:54 pm
Livingstone how about we charge all londoners
£ 25 each time they come out of london, ??????
June 9, 2008 at 3:02 pm
Its just another way to make money, the way to deal with congestion is, not to start charging people, but to improve the roads, reduce unnecessary traffic lights, have fly overs for a consistant flow of traffic. Rather than introducing another piggy bank scheme, try and use the out of the box approach to resolve such issues. Learn from other countries who have a network of flyovers.