ULEZ

[GaryH]

What about living in an area of a city you are not allowed to leave? You can’t travel to see family. Can’t go up to Alton.

Some think it’s fear mongering, but all the cameras are there, the restrictions are coming in slowly, China has been doing it for a while now and the world saw just hope they locked down particular zones with brutality during covid.

And as for walkable, that’s fine while young and mobile. What about the elderly and those with mobility problems who rely on their vehicle to have independence?

You’re lucky to live somewhere where you don’t need to use your car. Many people particularly those in rural areas are not as lucky.

 

[John]

This isn't China and not being allowed to leave an area is simply not happening in the UK. Anyone saying otherwise is lying or deluded

 

[Dave]

These schemes being brought in with no consultation and very little scientific backing behind them under the guise of saving the planet are very worrying for the future of democracy in this country.

While Boris introduced the congestion charge in London which I think is fair enough given you don’t actually need a car to get around central London, we are now seeing LTNs, expanded ULEZ zones and I was reading yesterday Bath is now going to introduce parking charges based on the type of car you are parking.

A diesel vehicle will end up paying twice as much as a petrol car to park in Bath in the future.

We have LTNs popping up all over the country since covid with no prior consultations, the expanded ULEZ around London with no scientific backing and wales pressing ahead with its 20mph blanket limit.

Only thing consistent with all these anti cat measures are they seem to be mostly in Labour run councils. Regardless though, it’s worrying all these changes are being brought in similar to how China or north Korea would introduce new rules as they see fit regardless what the majority think or want.

Many believe we are heading blindly into 15 minute cities. These are cities where travel between different zones by private vehicles within the city is prohibited and people doing so are fined. Think it’s sci fi? Oxford council are on the verge of trialling splitting the city into zones and issues passes to residents to allow them to cross zones a maximum of 100 times a year. If you exceed this then you get a £79 fine each year.

You basically become prisoner within each zone similar to that seen in futurist films. The elderly and those unable to use cycles or walk or public transport are going to be most impacted by this, and while climate change may be a concern for the next generation, I think this is an ever greater one as peoples freedoms and rights are taken away under the guise of being green.

People voted for a Tory government, the Tory government has pushed all the big cities to implement air pollution reduction measures. Democracy isn’t “you get a say in every decision” its “you elect representatives who decide these things”.

Also Johnson didn’t introduce the congestion charge, he introduced LEZ. Which is the same as ULEZ but in central London.

And finally the science absolutely supports these schemes, it’s only the wackjobs on social media who make stuff up to suggest science doesn’t support them.

 

[Thameslink Rail]

LEZ has always covered the entirety of Greater London, just for larger vehicles (generally 3.5 tonnes+). In fairness, the various zones have caused a lot of confusion (made worse by the tabloids and social media). On a consumer radio show I listen to, someone called in wondering why they received a ULEZ penalty notice dated 23rd August, they were somehow not aware that ULEZ already existed.

 

[GaryH]

ULEZ is nothing more than a way for Sadiks Labour run council to make more money to pay off the council debts. After all you can still drive a highly polluting vehicle in the zone if you pay the charge so it’s not really about clean air is it?

As for LEZ and congestion charge, same thing as far as I’m concerned, I have no problem with that in central London where a car isn’t needed.

As for science, the imperial college report which was commissioned by the mayors office (which also paid them £800k) found only a 3% reduction in nitrogen dioxide and a negligible effect on pollution overall.

The 4,000 deaths from air pollution which is spouted by the mayors office included all tours of air pollution of nitrogen dioxide and PM 2.5. This includes log burners, gas boilers, construction sites, trains.

The Government's Air Quality Expert Group shows PM2.5 pollution from car engines is now dwarfed by emissions from tyre and brake wear, as well as from abrasion of the road surface. And, emissions from these sources are increasing as heavier, Ulez-compliant vehicles – electric cars included – take to the roads.

The mayor also suggested a higher death rate in the new ULEZ zone as a reason to expand it. However the report also found a much higher elderly population in this area than in central London with as expected higher levels of mortality in this population.

Personally I find all these anti car and eco schemes total BS when you consider the UK amounts for just 1% of global CO2 emissions. I hope the ULEZ scheme is reversed along with the LTN schemes being introduced across the country which only increases pollution by moving traffic into other already congested areas. No doubt wales will kick out Labour at the next election and hopefully the ludicrous blanket 20mph will also be reversed and money put back in to decent road schemes to actually reduce pollution by keeping traffic flowing rather than being stuck on the M4 in stop start traffic.

And in future of schemes are to be introduced they must have as proper public consultation before being given the go ahead rather than being introduced in a dictatorial fashion.

@John while this isn’t China we are not far behind in the number of cctv cameras watching us, and as for not being allowed to move between these newly set up zones…. Let’s wait and see shall we. Obviously the rich will be able to do so and shorts the fines.

 

[Rob F]

The concept of Ulez is real reduce emissions but all the surveys etc include pedestrians as the more central you go in london the less drivers there are + the centre generally is filled with more of the richer suburbs who can afford nice compliant cars or not care about £12.50 a day as they can afford it…. Now ulez is expanding allot more of the general public is affected …..

Ulez = tax the poor the rich wont pay as they have nice compliant new cars

 

[rob666]

I don’t think it’s deluded. To put people into zones and fine then for crossing zones sounds very much like suppression of freedoms to me.

The scary thing is how many people in the UK seem quite happy sleepwalking into this. Mainly the younger generation.

You still aren't "free"...civilisation means curbing "freedoms" for the betterment of society.
"Free" to kill people you don't like...free to assault people who disagree with you...free to avoid taxes if you don't agree with them?
All part of society...for the benefit of all humans who breathe air.
Those humans who don't breathe air are free to opt out.
The public consultation on ULEZ was conducted, at length, in great detail, between May and July 2022, I followed it with interest at the time.
Older people and those with limited mobility already get good support, for free, through personal mobility provision and free public transport passes.
Young people are happily walking into this, probably because they have greater focus on how man is killing the planet through pollution.
We have just had the hottest days ever on the planet, time to wake up.

 

[Dave]

You still aren't "free"...civilisation means curbing "freedoms" for the betterment of society.
"Free" to kill people you don't like...free to assault people who disagree with you...free to avoid taxes if you don't agree with them?
All part of society...for the benefit of all humans who breathe air.
Those humans who don't breathe air are free to opt out.
The public consultation on ULEZ was conducted, at length, in great detail, between May and July 2022, I followed it with interest at the time.
Older people and those with limited mobility already get good support, for free, through personal mobility provision and free public transport passes.
Young people are happily walking into this, probably because they have greater focus on how man is killing the planet through pollution.
We have just had the hottest days ever on the planet, time to wake up.

GaryH likes conspiracy theories, I think arguing with logic is going to fail as in these cases the lies are always more compelling that the truth.

 

[Leigh]

The most incredulous thing about ULEZ is that, while they’re imposing these fees on ordinary working people, there’s an airport smack bang in the centre of London catering almost exclusively to domestic and short haul destinations that can be accessed incredibly easily (and often quicker, when you take into account security and other additional factors) by train, that produces many times more harmful emissions. If the goal is to reduce emissions, why aren’t we trying to phase LCY out of use and prioritise links to other airports outside the centre of the capital?

I mean, I think we all know the reason beginning with M and ending in Y, but I feel it’s a very valid point nonetheless.

 

[Dave]

The most incredulous thing about ULEZ is that, while they’re imposing these fees on ordinary working people, there’s an airport smack bang in the centre of London catering almost exclusively to domestic and short haul destinations that can be accessed incredibly easily (and often quicker, when you take into account security and other additional factors) by train, that produces many times more harmful emissions. If the goal is to reduce emissions, why aren’t we trying to phase LCY out of use and prioritise links to other airports outside the centre of the capital?

I mean, I think we all know the reason beginning with M and ending in Y, but I feel it’s a very valid point nonetheless.

Two different types of emission, ULEZ is fighting against the toxins released by cars that cause lung disease. Planes release CO2 which is a greenhouse gas.

The same people who agree with ULEZ will definitely support closing City of London Airport though, but the Mayor of London doesn’t have the power to do that.

It does baffle me how people do not understand the powers of the Mayor of London compared to the powers of the national government. If you want the Airport closed lobby parliament not Khan, if you want ULEZ stopped you need to lobby Khan AND get Westminster to remove the air quality requirements of the covid funding put in by Grant Shapps.

 

[GaryH]

The most incredulous thing about ULEZ is that, while they’re imposing these fees on ordinary working people, there’s an airport smack bang in the centre of London catering almost exclusively to domestic and short haul destinations that can be accessed incredibly easily (and often quicker, when you take into account security and other additional factors) by train, that produces many times more harmful emissions. If the goal is to reduce emissions, why aren’t we trying to phase LCY out of use and prioritise links to other airports outside the centre of the capital?

I mean, I think we all know the reason beginning with M and ending in Y, but I feel it’s a very valid point nonetheless.

Because ULEZ isn’t about reducing emissions. It’s just another way for the councils to raise funds. Glasgow is the only true ULEZ area where non compliant vehicles are actually banned or face a large fine for driving in to the centre.

Conspiracy - whatever Dave, time will tell but you can’t deny peoples freedoms and privacy are constantly being eroded. How anyone thinks being charged £70 to cross from one city zone to another is not an erosion of freedoms I don’t know….. thats not conspiracy by the way - that’s what’s happening in Oxford come 2040.

 

[Tom]

What about all other taxes, are they an erosion of freedoms? At what point was the red line crossed?

20-something percent of people put this government into power, and a similar figure will likely elect the next government. Apathy is consent of sort - so regardless of what phrase we want to apply to these and other policies, very few people are likely to ever feel strongly enough to do anything about it.

 

[Craig]

I use my car heavily but would gladly not if public transport was at a decent price, reliable and has realistic easy options of getting to places.

In terms of Oxford, I'm not completely up on it but a quick Google brings up a summary of the council's Central Oxfordshire travel plan. A summary of the planned dates are:

• Reducing 1 in 4 car trips by 2030
• Delivering a net-zero transport network by 2040
• Having zero, or as close as possible, road fatalities or life-changing injuries by 2050.

So I see nothing about a 2040 date for anything coming in. I do however see the information about the traffic filter trial due to start in 2024 once the station improvement works are finished. That's where there will be fines for passing through six roads in Oxford at certain times, not for travelling through zones. In essence it's much the same as the congestion charge. But, instead of just allowing the wealthy to pay, there's a real deterrent with a heavy fine for those who choose to use their vehicle via the routes below:

You can also see on their website they make it clear that alternative routes can be used to get to where people want to go, and residents both in Oxford and in the wider county will can apply for a permit to avoid those fines for a certain number of trips too.

As for the freedoms argument, what about the freedom of cyclists who are unable to get anywhere because of the sheer volume of cars on the road? Or a bus user who can't get anywhere reliably because the roads are too busy? Evolving public transport infrastructure will always disadvantage some people with the aim of it being for the greater good of the wider society. In the 60's when we were compulsory purchasing land and demolishing whole housing estates for ring roads and motorways - was that not an "erosion of freedom"? So it's not a new thing, or a conspiracy - it'll always happen and it has to happen as our way of living evolves.

Providing there is serious thought put into providing the alternatives to personal transport in these areas, and in the case of 15 minute cities, the facilities are actually put in place - then it's a no brainer in my opinion.

 

[Benzin]

Enjoying all these claims about the "you'll be charged money if you dare to exit your designated living zone" without any sources as to this actually happening.

What would they do about travelling to work? Or are they forcing everyone to WFH so you're just locked inside your house all day?

Oh no, I'll have my GP half the distance away from me. That's SUCH a pain. Doing this would absolutely benefit the elderly and disabled as well, especially if transport links improved immensely.

But those who want to believe some nonsense about our "freedoms being curtailed" as part of some scheme that is being implemented by... someone, like those I see protesting on Wednesdays down the road near my house want to be heard. Maybe Sandra took the kids away and there's not much else to do at home.

Similar nonsense with ULEZ, Covid and 5G. The increase in wingnuts in the UK is terrifying, especially as they'll whinge about all the issues facing people and still vote Tory because the likes of Corbyn would dare to implement free Internet for everyone. Just another method to keep everyone under surveillance since the government really want that data that's already being eagerly harvested by Amazon or Meta.

 

[GaryH]

Further details about the Oxford scheme here:

What are 15-minute cities and why are they controversial?

The idea behind 15-minute cities is simple; their application is anything but

www.carwow.co.uk

“ Oxford City Council is planning a 15-minute city, but Oxford County Council is trialling a separate scheme that sees the city split into six zones, with residents issued 100 passes each year to drive between the zones, and £70 penalties issued to those who exceed this limit ”

 

[rob666]

Carwow blog, not at all biased towards the car owner at all.

 

[GaryH]

Carwow blog, not at all biased towards the car owner at all.

Doesn’t matter as long as it’s factual. A cycling magazine will be the opposite end of the scale.

 

[rob666]

Having read the article at length, and checked out Oxfords plans, I can only see them as a sensible and logical solution to a clear issue with congestion pollution, and local car users using the city centre as a rat run on the school run.
Use the routes round the city and go free...every last time...
And you can still cut through the city twice a week for free.
And, needless to say, they did have a lengthy consultation exercise on the matter around the end of last year.
...just trying to stop needless local car journeys where there are clean, easy, healthy alternatives.

 

[Tom]

Where's the bit about not being allowed to leave certain areas or see family?

 

[Craig]

So I never thought I'd be countering a CarWow blog post on here, but anyway the full quote from the article, with the important final sentence included:

Oxford County Council is trialling a separate scheme that sees the city split into six zones, with residents issued 100 passes each year to drive between the zones, and £70 penalties issued to those who exceed this limit – although no physical barriers will exist, free movement by other modes of transport remains unrestricted, as would driving out to the ring road before heading back into a different area.

So even the CarWow blog is pointing out you can get to other areas with no issue if you want to, without getting a fine.

It's also worth noting the use of the term zone in the Carwow article, as that's not factual. There is nothing on Oxfordshire County Council' website about the city being split into six zones. There are going to be 6 traffic filters - that is, 6 locations on sections roads where cameras are going to be located. They operate in much the same way as virtual bus gates which have cropped up in many towns and cities. A quote from the "What are traffic filters" section of the website:

Traffic filters are intended to reduce traffic levels in Oxford by managing the use of certain roads in the city by private cars.

Cars will be prohibited from driving through the traffic filters without a permit while the filters are in operation. All other vehicles including taxis, buses, coaches, all vans, mopeds, motorbikes and HGVs can still pass through these traffic filters at all times.

The filters are not physical barriers, automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras will monitor and enforce the restrictions.

It will be physically possible to drive through the filters during restricted times without a permit, but you will receive a penalty charge notice (PCN) if you do so.

The traffic filters cover very short lengths of road (just a few metres). Any vehicle can use the road outside the filter at any time without a permit.

Residents in Oxford and some areas just outside the city will be able to apply for a permit allowing them to drive through the traffic filters on up to 100 days each year.

Other Oxfordshire residents will be able to apply for a permit allowing them to drive through the traffic filters for up to 25 days each year.

And a map of the six locations:

As you can see, 6 measly locations across the city is not going to form "zones" where residents can't cross, completely in disagreement with a lot of the crap being pumped out by predominately right-wing media outlets. It's solely designed to make vehicle journeys more unappealing along those main arteries into the city. It then frees up road capacity to make the alternatives of public transport easier and more reliable in order to encourage their use. Want to use you car? Fine, hit the ring road. Resident? No problem, you have 100 days a year where you get fine free access along those roads.

Now in the interests of fairness to the debate, the traffic filters form only part of the plan for Oxford. In addition to this, there is a zone being developed, but it's not splitting the city into 6. The Oxford Zero Emission Zone that covers the city centre. This is currently in pilot with a very small section of the city centre (in purple), and a later wider area within the city centre being proposed:

I've visited Oxford a number of times over the years, both driving into it and using the the bus and using both forms I've ended up stuck in traffic - it's unsustainable to carry on like that. Anything that makes public transport easier while still remaining a sensible price is a plus in my view.