Boris scraps the western congestion charge extension

Plans to scrap the western extension of the cc zone have been shelved

Good.

Because of the recession? There goes the "it's not a tax" argument.

Anyway, good.

It will be great for this part of London which is already struggling and it is absolutely the right thing to do, especially from an economical point of vie

Notting Hill, Kensington, Kings Road, Sloane Square.. Man i pity the poor

This is a good thing, Congestion will drop BUT it does raise money for improvements and our roads are shit in places - i'd like to see a way for us to campaign/recommend improvements - that would be listening to the people Boris

boris twittered this morning : 'I said I wld listen to Londoners, they said they don’t want it. Whatever you hear otherwise, I will be removing the WEZ'

update,

he then added @ 13:04 :'Lets be crystal clear about this. The WEZ will be removed by the end of next year. Amen.'

Balls.

Twitter link:

http://twitter.com/MayorOfLOndon

The Evening Standard comment is worth reading:

http://tinyurl.com/ltovly

The Mayor’s U-turn is right but unfortunate

                                                           **Evening Standard comment**
                                                                                                                                                                           23.09.09                                                    

                   There is a difference between an aspiration and a commitment; there need be no loss of face for a politician in temporarily abandoning an aspiration. 

The trouble is, Boris Johnson's intention to scrap the western zone of the congestion charge looked like a commitment and sounded like a commitment. So his decision to do a U-turn on abolishing the western zone next year will do him some political harm. For many people, scrapping the extension was a clear element of his election manifesto.

Having said which, the U-turn is right. It would be madness to forgo an important source of revenue for public transport at a time when Transport for London is struggling to square falling passenger revenue with diminished government financial support. And the congestion charge raises between £55 million and £70 million for TfL. If it comes to a choice between raising bus fares and scrapping the western zone of the C‑charge, it is no choice: public transport takes priority.

This paper has been antagonistic to the western extension of the charge from the outset because of its effect on business, especially in a recession. But, as we have argued in the past, there is a middle way. It would be possible to impose the C-charge in the western zone for peak travel times while scrapping it for the greater part of the day, allowing for deliveries and customer visits by car to businesses within the zone at quieter times.

This would, admittedly, raise rather less revenue. It would also be complicated to have a flexible western congestion area while keeping a blanket all-day charge in the central area. But a compromise, however muddled, would be preferable to penalising businesses for their location, which is what the charge does.

For the immediate future, the Mayor is right to do whatever he can to maintain revenue for public transport without raising fares. His reputation, however, as a politician who keeps his word will take time to recover.

removal of the congestion charge extension is going ahead. will result in more congestion, more pollution, more CO2, less cycling, less walking - according to tfl..

you can object here, before august 2nd..

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/congestioncharging/15520.aspx

And the possible fine from the EU due to the pollution levels won't help either...

Objected.
What a fucking belter Boris is.

The more he open his mouth, the more he sound like he's simply trying to win people's vote for the next election.

like the motorcycles on bus lanes for instance, not sure how he'd get more vote for cutting the funding toward cycling in London.

If he wanted motorcyclists on his side he wouldn't have implemented the £1 per day parking charge on them

He's a bit of a diffcuilt individual to read that's for sure.

Feckin Tories....

Just put in my objection there. Do it!

Objection made and eloquently so...

!. It's disastrous to remove the Western Extension, it's a giant leap backwards, please don't do this and please try and encourage less use of motorised transport in the Capitol.

1. Good to increase the congestion charge, well overdue.
   
   

The other proposals (Replacing the Alternative Fuel discount with a new Greener Vehicle discount
Making changes to the Electric Vehicle discount
Introducing a new registration charge for 9+ seated vehicles) are all useful in helping people to value the ecological impact of their transport choices when considering investing in motorised transport, but in effect just give a way forward for them to increase the vehicle congestion, I think these are all valid and useful measures for London but should be separate from and unrelated to the congestion charge, we need to implement changes that will cause a modal shift away from personal motorised transport not to more personal motorised transport with a different fuel or bigger cars or ones that require more electricity to be generated...
So in short let's increase the congestion charge and have less congestion.

1. The introduction of the congestion charge was a bold and important move in one of the most influential cities on the planet, in order for it to maintain any effectiveness it must at least keep up with if not excede inflation to encourage changes in behaviour and attitudes.
   

The congestion charge is the best way to encourage people to change their habit, if it involved their money, they'll simply change their habit to be able to save a few pennies from not just paying for the CC but eventually realise that with their change of transport/acitivity, they're already saving quite a huge amount of money by using their motorised vehicle less than usual (and especially if they choose to ride a bike).

1+ on it being a step forward.

Have you objected Ed?

done and dusted, with the main point that London is facing a huge fine from the E.U. if it does not reduced it's pollution, so not only the move will mean TfL get less money, but face a huge fine on top of that (I think it's £300 millions).

You know what the worse thing is? Boris comissioned a study that show 4,300 deaths a year cause by poor air quality in London.

The argument that central London should be a car free location is flawed, there are many uses for cars in London that you dont think about; emergency services, transporting large objects between locations quickly throughout the day (I know I personally couriered 300 shoes from Bermondsy to Regent Street recently, if you can find me a cycle courier that can carry 300 shoes then please let me know. Also what about people who have to carry a lot of equipment into work such as mysel?

my comment from two years ago (blimey!) was flawed to says the least, a car free city is a wonderful dream but almost impossible to keep the cog running without certain motorised vehicle.

I think it's safe to says that I'd like to see less people using their personal cars to make short trips would be a realistic aim.

I've objected to the Indigestion Charge. I feel better for it.

my comment from two years ago (blimey!) was flawed to says the least, a car free city is a wonderful dream but almost impossible to keep the cog running without certain motorised vehicle.

I think it's safe to says that I'd like to see less people using their personal cars to make short trips would be a realistic aim.

Keep the idea of a car free city in your mind though.

If you give an inch, they'll take a mile... actually, several square miles in this case.

No quarter and all that. Demand the impossible. etc.

It best to aim high, so when regrettable compromise with motorists comes (spit), better results are achieved.

Still too infeasible, an example would be drivers' awareness of cyclists/peds on a daily basis, without encountering them, they'll likely to get too comfortable and have a higher chance of hitting a peds simply because they're not expecting them.

Same goes toward cyclists, not only that, it'll bring the dreaded 'us vs. them' mentality of the drivers simply because they end up not getting used to seeing cyclists so frequency on the road and thus doesn't get 'used' to seeing them.

So sometime segregation is never the answer, and even if you don't like motorised vehicles, they're still here to stay, and it does bring benefit such as having the fastest ambulance respond service in Europe (average time of five minutes).

What is certainly required in London is more active motor traffic restraint. This was tantalisingly flagged up in the Mayor's Transport Strategy of 2001 but, apart from Congestion Charging, hardly acted on. Motor traffic restraint can take many forms, from the establishment of walking and cycling-only zones (permission for motorised deliveries, works access, etc. of course), to filtered permeability. This is as 'car-free' as you can get, and eminently sensible.