Stop expanding the ULEZ to all the London boroughs in 2023

[MissyD]

Has anyone registered their vehicle for the ULEZ charging? I'm thinking of doing the auto pay (I have this for the Dartford Crossing) as its easier than remembering to pay after each crossing. Just wondered what others have done.

 

[ChipChop]

I refer the honourable member to the EDIT added to my post #1,957

I would suggest any future models coming from ICL on any subject should be taken with a generous pinch of salt.

 

[markjay]

The conclusions from the Jacobs Solutions 200 page report on the expanded ULEZ scheme is available in the House of Commons library. See link below.

Quick synopsis of the report...
A moderatley positive effect of NOX (a 1.4% fall)
A minimal effect on particulate matter (a 0.1% fall)
A moderate negative impact on disabled people that do not qualify for motability
A moderate negative impact on people on low incomes accessing employment in outer London
A moderate negative impact on people with restricted mobility
A moderate negative impact on people who recieve domicillary care
A moderate negative impact on mobile healthcare services and informal care in outer London
A minor negative impact on contraction of the labour market, increased costs for light goods vehicles and a loss in retail spending.

https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2022-0240/CDP-2022-0240.pdf

So, according to this report, there's a moderate improvement to people's health, at the cost of a moderate negative impact of certain groups of people. Is this correct?

If so, then it's simply a question of where you see the right balance between the two. There's no one hard point, instead it's a question of what our social values are, and what is politically feasible. The proof is that different cities chose different solutions to improving air quality - again, there's no one answer as to where this balance lies.

I would also add that this is in fact just a subset of our society's bigger dillemas. Over the last 30 years we implemented minimum wages,and workplace pension, we've increased workers' annual holiday allowance, revised the Consumer Rights Act, and much more. All great for workers and for consumers, BUT - businesses didn't go bust, so where did the money for all these great initiatives came from? The additional cost to businesses was rolled onto the consumer, and the additional cost for public service employees was rolled onto the taxpayer (we all pay 20% VAT.... It was10% once). You could equally agree that in our never-ending pursuit of improving workers' lives and protecting consumers from dishonest business practices, we are in fact hurting the poor and vulnerable who struggle with the ever-increasing cost of living, and who ultimately share the cost of providing all these great things to our workforce and to our consumers.

In fact, in large part, the reason that owners of older Diesel cars stand to lose-out as much as they do when trading-in their non-compliant cars for different compliant ones, is the Consumer Protection Act 2015. Car dealers didn't go out of business the day after the Act was introduced, instead they added their own new costs into the retail price. Whenever someone returns a lemon within the 30 days period, or gets the supplying dealer to fix an expensive fault FOC within the 6 months period, that's a cost that is shared by all those other happy buyers who paid the asking price and had no issues with their cars. Scrap the Consumer Protection Act, and owners of old Diesel cars will find that replacing their cars is now much cheaper.

I am obviously not suggesting that we should scrap all those social measures we've implemented, just pointing-out that incurring the cost of this social improvements is part-and-parcel of living in a civilised society. The same applies to health benefits that cost money and - like everything else - hurt the poor and vulnerable more than it hurts other more-fortunate groups.

 

[markjay]

Has anyone registered their vehicle for the ULEZ charging? I'm thinking of doing the auto pay (I have this for the Dartford Crossing) as its easier than remembering to pay after each crossing. Just wondered what others have done.

Please stop bothering us with reasonable, practical, and down-to-earth posts. Can you not see that this thread is reserved for philosophical academic and pointless debate between a bunch of grumpy old men with nothing better to do with their time?

Sorry MissyD, couldn't resist

 

[markjay]

I would suggest any future models coming from ICL on any subject should be taken with a generous pinch of salt.

Not possible for me I'm afraid. I've got Hypertension...

 

[Darrell]

I would suggest any future models coming from ICL on any subject should be taken with a generous pinch of salt.

I’ll be honest, at my age I take most things with a generous pinch of salt.

Government.
NHS.
TFL.
The railways.
Any union.
Airlines.
The Police.
The EU.
Border Force.
All politicians.
Sadiq Kahn.
DVLA.
The Highways Agency.
The BBC.
Passport office.
Local councils and there subsideries (parking etc)
Hypocritical protesters.

All of them being liars, greedy and manipulative. None of them have any backbone or morals.

 

[Gollom]

I would also add that this is in fact just a subset of our society's bigger dillemas. Over the last 30 years we implemented minimum wages,and workplace pension, we've increased workers' annual holiday allowance, revised the Consumer Rights Act, and much more. All great for workers and for consumers, BUT - businesses didn't go bust, so where did the money for all these great initiatives came from? The additional cost to businesses was rolled onto the consumer, and the additional cost for public service employees was rolled onto the taxpayer (we all pay 20% VAT.... It was10% once). You could equally agree that in our never-ending pursuit of improving workers' lives and protecting consumers from dishonest business practices, we are in fact hurting the poor and vulnerable who struggle with the ever-increasing cost of living, and who ultimately share the cost of providing all these great things to our workforce and to our consumers.

When they finally did something (quite rightly) about inequality of wages between the sexes, our local authority admirably bought into this and raised female wages. To the same level as the newly revised reduced male wages. I understand the overall wage bill remained the same........

 

[Darrell]

When they finally did something (quite rightly) about inequality of wages between the sexes, our local authority admirably bought into this and raised female wages. To the same level as the newly revised reduced male wages. I understand the overall wage bill remained the same........

Is that what they did? Reduce the male wage to match the female wage? That’s brilliant.

 

[Gollom]

Is that what they did? Reduce the male wage to match the female wage? That’s brilliant.

Apparently so. Given that I heard the same from a few diverse sources, I suspect it is not an urban legend

 

[TrueSpirit]

The if we do nothing argument was played out in reality thanks to Sweden.

That countries Uppsala University also borrowed ICL's modelling and adapted it to their country with similar catastrophic results to the UK and US. Proving the ICL model was nonsense.

So the brilliant imperial model predicted 100k deaths without interventions and when the interventions were not implemented the actual deaths were 10% of the prediction. Instead of challenging the assumptions in the model, the smoke screen used was to compare the death rate vs other Scandinavian countries. The hypothesis from the modelling was out by 1000% but the model continued to be used to push the agenda. I read around 50 scientific papers that say pretty much the same thing.

The 4000 deaths sound bite is as accurate as the existence of Saddam's WMDs. The whole argument is null and void straight away so its worth being honest about why this measures are being implemented. It is not to save lives.

 

[Darrell]

Apparently so. Given that I heard the same from a few diverse sources, I suspect it is not an urban legend

I’m sure I heard the same sort of thing in sport.

The women complained that the men’s prize money was much more than theirs and the men actually came out in solidarity. The men’s prize money was subsequently dropped to match the women’s!!

The men then immediately forgot their solidarity and complained like fook.

 

[RichWeath]

What?

They literally give you £2k to buy a suitable car if you don’t have one - if you own a sub £2k value vehicle it’s a free upgrade essentially.

If you own a more expensive car, you sell it on privately and buy another equal value compliant one. (Assuming you can’t afford the extra money needed to buy a newer car)

Some people are upset they have to replace their flashy Euro 5 oil-burner with an older petrol car as they can’t afford the additional cost to buy a (newer) flashy Euro 6 equivalent oil-burner. Is that the end of the world when we’re in a ‘cost of living crisis’… as a lot on here seem to keep reminding us?

You only get that if you're on universal credit. Which if you're employed full time on minimum wage you obviously don't get. Now try being on minimum wage trying to pay rent in London, whilst saving to get out of London and then having to buy a new car or pay £12.50 every day to go to your minimum wage job.

Its not that easy!

I feel like some of the comments on here have no real life experience of a life without a combined household income of 100k.
Most people can't just sell a car that's not complient (who to, it's worth **** all in the area they're selling) and buy a car that's now 2k over it's book price just because it's compliment.

This has nothing to do with clean air, it's control and record.

 

[markjay]

So the brilliant imperial model predicted 100k deaths without interventions and when the interventions were not implemented the actual deaths were 10% of the prediction. Instead of challenging the assumptions in the model, the smoke screen used was to compare the death rate vs other Scandinavian countries. The hypothesis from the modelling was out by 1000% but the model continued to be used to push the agenda. I read around 50 scientific papers that say pretty much the same thing.

The 4000 deaths sound bite is as accurate as the existence of Saddam's WMDs. The whole argument is null and void straight away so its worth being honest about why this measures are being implemented. It is not to save lives.

Let's assume your analysis is correct. How is it relevant to ULEZ?

You are saying the one researcher in one department in one UK academic institute got it wrong.

I could understand it if you said you'll never trust any research published by that same person.

But you could also equally say that you'll never trust any research published by this particular department. Or by this particular university. Or by any London university. Or by any UK university. Or by any academic institute worldwide.

However, in this case, cunningly the net is cast just wide enough to catch that other, unrelated research (by different researchers is a different department), that needs to be discarded. I.e., the argument is that "we cannot trust any research that comes out of ICL".

So why stop at ICL? Because the wider the net, the less convincing the argument?

I think it's obvious that the only purpose of bringing the COVID modeling into the debate, is to try and discredit any ULEZ favourable report. If the research was published by Oxford university, we've have heard that 'UK researchers can't be trusted', etc.

 

[Darrell]

You only get that if you're on universal credit. Which if you're employed full time on minimum wage you obviously don't get. Now try being on minimum wage trying to pay rent in London, whilst saving to get out of London and then having to buy a new car or pay £12.50 every day to go to your minimum wage job.

Its not that easy!

I feel like some of the comments on here have no real life experience of a life without a combined household income of 100k.
Most people can't just sell a car that's not complient (who to, it's worth **** all in the area they're selling) and buy a car that's now 2k over it's book price just because it's compliment.

This has nothing to do with clean air, it's control and record.

I thought Kahn changed the rules in a last ditched attempt to gain some support??

 

[TC350]

What nonsense are you referring to specifically.

”The Great Reset”

 

[clk320x]

You only get that if you're on universal credit. Which if you're employed full time on minimum wage you obviously don't get. Now try being on minimum wage trying to pay rent in London, whilst saving to get out of London and then having to buy a new car or pay £12.50 every day to go to your minimum wage job.

Its not that easy!

I feel like some of the comments on here have no real life experience of a life without a combined household income of 100k.
Most people can't just sell a car that's not complient (who to, it's worth **** all in the area they're selling) and buy a car that's now 2k over it's book price just because it's compliment.

This has nothing to do with clean air, it's control and record.

The scrappage scheme is open to EVERYONE…

 

[clk320x]

Most people can't just sell a car that's not complient (who to, it's worth **** all in the area they're selling) and buy a car that's now 2k over it's book price just because it's compliment.

I literally show cars for £1k that are compliant in previous posts.

Every Londoner is eligible for the scrappage scheme. (Not just those on low incomes or in receipt of benefits)

People keep avoiding this point and going round in circles.

 

[markjay]

You only get that if you're on universal credit. Which if you're employed full time on minimum wage you obviously don't get. Now try being on minimum wage trying to pay rent in London, whilst saving to get out of London and then having to buy a new car or pay £12.50 every day to go to your minimum wage job.

Its not that easy!

I feel like some of the comments on here have no real life experience of a life without a combined household income of 100k.
Most people can't just sell a car that's not complient (who to, it's worth **** all in the area they're selling) and buy a car that's now 2k over it's book price just because it's compliment.

That's no longer the case. From TfL website:

"We have expanded the eligibility of the scrappage scheme and increased our grant payments to help even more London residents, and London-based charities and small businesses benefit from the available funds and prepare for the ULEZ expansion.

Any London resident living in one of the 32 London boroughs or the City of London with an eligible vehicle can apply to scrap a car or motorcycle, as you no longer need to receive certain benefits to apply."

Obviously, those who already traded-in their old Diesel cars before the change in eligibility might not be amused.........

EDIT: as others have already posted.

 

[TrueSpirit]

”The Great Reset

What about it?

 

[markjay]

..This has nothing to do with clean air, it's control and record.

I won't argue with that, because you can't argue with that. No more that one can prove there's no God, or that there is one. It's a question of one's personal belief system. You carry on believing in what you think is true, and I'll carry on seeing the world in the way I see it. If you are interested in my own point of view, then I recommend that you read this book: