Now Big Stupid Cars May Get Charged in London
by Jeff McIntire-Strasburg, St. Louis, MO on 11.16.06
In March, we noted that London mayor Ken Livingstone had labeled drivers of Urban 4x4s as "complete idiots." We learned yesterday that Livingstone plans to do more than just call "Chelsea tractor" drivers names; he wants to make them pay more for the privilege of driving large SUVs in London's "congestion zone." According to The Times,
The London Mayor said he wants to introduce an emissions-based congestion charge fee in an attempt to reduce pollution in the capital that will hit the pockets of drivers of the most heavily-polluting vehicles.If that weren't enough of a blow to Urban 4x4 drivers, the Mayor also proposed eliminating the 90% discount given to residents of the congestion zone if they choose big polluting vehicles. This also comes on top of the Richmond Council's plan to institute emissions-based parking charges on residents in its SW London district.Vehicles in the excise duty Band G with carbon-dioxide emission above 225g per km, would pay the top charge, while drivers of the least polluting cars, like the G-Wiz, would be charged nothing under the proposals.
Mr Livingstone said: "Most vehicles that will be charged £25 [~$47.50 US], in Vehicle Excise Duty Band G, are high priced models. Those who buy them can afford to choose from pretty much the whole of the mainstream car market but have chosen to buy one of the most polluting vehicles. [my emphasis]
"By making these changes to the congestion charging scheme we are encouraging people to take into account the impact of their choice of new car on the environment and the planet."
While some will certainly complain about these proposed changes, it's hard to argue that they're unfair: drivers only pay if they choose to continue driving a gas-guzzler in the Duty Band. In a city with world-class public transportation, that seems like a luxury that should carry an extra price. ::The Times via Streetsblog
Interesting to note the emphasis on this story has been squarely placed on the big bad 4x4, when a quick glance at the vehicles in band G shows a high percentage of normal family cars :-
Vauxhall Zafira people carrier (2.0 litre petrol)
Renault Espace people carrier (2.0 litre petrol)
SEAT Alhambra people carrier (2.0 litre petrol)
Jaguar X-Type estate (2.5 litre petrol)
Peugeot 407 estate (2.2 litre petrol)
Honda Accord estate (2.4 litre petrol)
Ford Mondeo estate (2.0 litre petrol)
Saab 9-3 estate (2.3 litre petrol)
VW Passat saloon (1.8 litre petrol turbo tiptronic)
Citroën C5 saloon (3.0 litre petrol)
Hardly a litany of £50k trophy off roaders or luxobarges is it. This proposal will clobber ordinary families hard. Whilst I support reductions in congestion and better air quality, it is interesting to note that areas of East and North London with crippling traffic issues aren't in the zone, yet the proposed Western extension will cover some of the wealthiest districts. All this at the same time as an unexpected VAT bill adding £1bn to the cost of the 2012 Olympics. Hmmm.
Interesting to note the emphasis on this story has been squarely placed on the big bad 4x4, when a quick glance at the vehicles in band G shows a high percentage of normal family cars.... This proposal will clobber ordinary families hard.
How did you come up with that list? Care to give a complete breakdown of G Band vehicles by vehicle type and price, then compare that to vehicles in other bands.
Ordinary families, as you call them, are going to own the less expensive, more thrifty vehicles. Otherwise they aren't ordinary families, are they?
Keep in mind, too, that the annual is £200-215, and the bare minimum anyone will pay is £30-50/yr for Band B vehicles (since there are no Band A vehicles). So, the net fee for a Band G vehicle is £165-170 per year, or about £14 per month.
Do you think an "ordinary family" can endure the "hardship" of such a fee?
What's with the attitude?
What's with the attitude?
Contribute, don't whine.
Source for the data was :-
http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk
As for the "they can afford to pay" class war logic...
Porsche Cayman manual(£36220 base price) - band F
Chevrolet Tacuma 2.0 CDX auto (£11199) - band G.
Which is the "ordinary family" more likely to have I wonder?
Getting traffic out of city centres IS a good idea, I just despise the sneering way Livingstone is going about it. If it's a pollution charge, then at least have the honesty to label it as such.
As for the "they can afford to pay" class war logic...
Class war logic? LOL. Funny.
Porsche Cayman manual(£36220 base price) - band F; Chevrolet Tacuma 2.0 CDX auto (£11199) - band G.
Cherry pick much? When are you actually going to show what the average G Band vehicle is compared to a lower band?
Which is the "ordinary family" more likely to have I wonder?
In general, the cheaper vehicles, which also tend to be smaller and more efficient. This is basic common sense, and if you run the data from that website (ie, correlate bands with price), you'll see that, I'm sure. But you'd rather talk about "class war" and cherry pick, it appears.
I just despise the sneering way Livingstone is going about it
Oh, no - he's "sneering"! Well, that completely delegitimizes the idea -- you don't like how it's presented to you by a particular person. How rational of you.
If it's a pollution charge, then at least have the honesty to label it as such.
How else are they supposed to track vehicles? You seem to be ignoring the fact that they need some systematic way of categorizing, tracking, charging, and so forth. Would you rather they have people standing by with rulers in their hands to measure each vehicle as it comes in and out of cental London?
It's quite simple - if people don't want to pay the extra money, then find another way to get there, don't go there, or buy/use a different vehicle.
I look forward to those numbers about what a typical G Band vehicle is compared to the other bands.
No measuring all gasoline using vehicles should be effected.