please empty your brain below
I think this will prove to be the mayor’s ‘poll tax’ moment. And no consideration for those in the home counties who can’t get scrappage, can’t apply for Oyster 60+ cards, and most importantly can’t vote the mayor out. Taxation without representation. This lack of accountability was a big reason why TfL was blocked from taking more NR train services into the London Overground brand. And l don’t see any expansion of cross-boundary TfL bus routes. PS - l don’t drive!

Kim | 22.08.23 - 10:35 a.m. | #

I live just outside a London Borough. My neighbour is a care worker who visits clients in their homes in London. She doesn't get a car with the job and her car is not ULEZ compliant. She will have to buy another. Extending the scrappage scheme to those who live outside but come into London to work should have been on the agenda. It's always the "little people" who suffer.

Marmaduke Jinks | 22.08.23 - 12:07 p.m. | #

It’s the thin end of the wedge. It’s a small number of cars that are uncompliant now but he’ll need to raise more and more money so will add more and more restrictions. It’s not about now it’s about the future.

Slippy | 23.08.23 - 6:48 a.m. | #

Ulez - another thing to divide us.

hudgepupper | 23.08.23 - 6:57 a.m. | #

What troubles me most though are those people who actually believe we have an emissions problem, especially an invisible one. I have commented before on the positioning of a sensor in Wallington directly by the rear of a busy bus stop, just where exhaust emissions are by far the greatest, and not representative of >99.99% of the capital.

Even with this subterfuge, the current overall level of emissions are miniscule on a historic basis. For those who do not have an entrenched view, then a simple Web search will show this. Likewise, it has just been shown that the research that was used to justify the scheme was paid for, and found to be flawed. The political imperative prevails.

Ken | 23.08.23 - 8:15 a.m. | #

I am surprised at the number of ULEZ lovers on here on what is a crazy unjustified scheme. The 'pollution' figures are as always based on a flawed model and I am not convinced there is any 'danger' from these alleged incompatible vehicles. OK I am unlikely to be driving anywhere near ULEZ London and my 20 year old Fiesta seems compatible anyway but this must be the biggest money grabbing scheme ever and Mr Mayor should be ashamed.

davews | 23.08.23 - 8:16 a.m. | #

Whilst extending to the North/Circulars was more viable due to the abundance of public transport alternatives, that's not the case in (more or less) extending to the M25 perimeter. There are many parts near the boundary that see, at best, one bus route, usually on an infrequent basis. Where is the help for these people such as an improvement in public transport provision? Ah yes, Superloop. That'll help the residents of outer NW London...

It's a tax, a precursor to paying per mile and a way to boost TfL coffers, nothing more, nothing less.

S | 23.08.23 - 9:00 a.m. | #

Tyranny.

Nowt else to say really.

John | 23.08.23 - 10:16 a.m. | #

Amazing how it's a problem, but for £12.50 the emissions just 'vanish'.

Badly thought out, badly implemented.

Jordan D | 23.08.23 - 3:00 p.m. | #

Here in east Greenwich we already have ULEZ. Khan has approved a ruddy great tunnel under the Thames allowing HGVs and other larger vehicle through (which the Blackwall Tunnel can't accommodate) and yet the creaking road infrastructure here is being reduced by cycle lanes.
What is he on?

Chris | 23.08.23 - 6:22 p.m. | #

You have my sympathies, Chris. Just looking at how things have changed in Greenwich (and Lewisham) made me ever thankful to be in Bromley.
Can't even be left alone, here, now :(
If Jonathan over with the other lot knew what I thought about ULEZ he'd probably count me as one of Bromley's horrible people. I get a feeling the thoughts would probably be mutual.

RogerW | 23.08.23 - 9:08 p.m. | #











TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy