| London ULEZ, who can afford it now 10:03 - Nov 25 with 30269 views | RangersDave |
Just announced that ULEZ in the smoke is going to get bigger, and expanded to cover all of London.
WTF?
Up here in Manchester it will happen soon, making average Joe and Josephine pay to take their car past the boundary, which extends to the border with the M6!
all in all, what a sh1t show. [Post edited 25 Nov 2022 10:23]
|  |
| |  |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 23:59 - Sep 1 with 1346 views | PunteR |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 23:00 - Sep 1 by loftupper |
So for the cost of £12.50 per day if he is driving a non compliant van he is going to stop providing services to what I would imagine would be a busy sector?
I would imagine there is more to it than simply that.
Why wouldn't he upgrade his mode of transport? |
Read Bluce rees post. Its not just ULEZ. |  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 09:34 - Sep 2 with 1176 views | Esox_Lucius |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 12:44 - Sep 1 by Blue_Castello |
Sorry not convinced at all 5 Conservative Council's went to court to try and get this blocked, very sadly the Court ruled against them and said that Ayatollah Khan can carry on with his crusade under the pretense that we will all live longer.
This is all about raising money not about health, I fully supported the ULEZ in the City and Central London and have happily paid my £12.50 to go to Loftus Road with my van and park in my usual place at the back of Wormholt Park.
We live in Uxbridge the London Borough of Hillingdon we are in a very short walking distance of Buckinghamshire, theres no getting away from the fact that Hillingdon has one of the highest pollution ratios in Greater London but if you Google Heathrow Airport you have your answer. |
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/leaked-letter-shows-govt-urged-khan-t |  |
| The grass is always greener. |
| |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 10:16 - Sep 2 with 1152 views | traininvain |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 22:41 - Sep 1 by Lblock |
I had a Final Account meeting with a regular Drylining company I use week before last.
He’s been working for me and others in our industry at least 25 years
Mainly west end and city based jobs
I was shocked (sort of) when he announced to me he’s basically going to start turning work down in our sweet spot areas as it’s “just not worth it anymore”
ULEZ was one of the factors but we both agreed, as a pair of washed up,rinsed out old dinosaurs, that London is fcukd compared to what we knew and loved. It’s had it.
Biggest job I’ve done this year is proper satellite in Maidenhead
Client view is cheaper, nicer and international visitors hit Heathrow and do a left and not a right. They’ll use Windsor rather than the bright lights
Meanwhile there’ll be cleaner air (by 0.001%) for the crackheads around Holborn |
Somehow I think plenty of others will step in to take the work in central London. As for people heading to Windsor instead of central London, I work in central every day and I’ve never seen it busier than this summer. It’s mainly driven by tourism and I doubt tourists will be deterred by ULEZ. |  | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 11:18 - Sep 2 with 1102 views | Lblock |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 23:00 - Sep 1 by loftupper |
So for the cost of £12.50 per day if he is driving a non compliant van he is going to stop providing services to what I would imagine would be a busy sector?
I would imagine there is more to it than simply that.
Why wouldn't he upgrade his mode of transport? |
You know the bit where I say “was one of the factors”…..did you miss that bit?
Why should he upgrade his fleet? That’s a capital outlay he doesn’t need to do if he makes that conscious decision not to come into London. He’ll still be earning and his relatively modern vehicles won’t be killing people where they’ll be working.
It will however mean there’s less people doing his work in London which pushes prices up, more pressure and all manner of things….some of which many will see as a positive.
When I am in town these days I find myself being such a wistful old bstard thinking “back in my day” like some scornful version of Uncle Albert. It’s such a changed place with so much control, pressure, aggression and the obvious hugely inflated prices.
I am old |  |
| Cherish and enjoy life.... this ain't no dress rehearsal |
| |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 12:05 - Sep 2 with 1032 views | Ned_Kennedys |
Have you read that link properly?
A 2020 letter about the 2021 ULËZ expansion to the North and South Circulars: nothing about the 2023 expansion out into the countryside. |  | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 14:15 - Sep 2 with 957 views | traininvain |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 11:18 - Sep 2 by Lblock |
You know the bit where I say “was one of the factors”…..did you miss that bit?
Why should he upgrade his fleet? That’s a capital outlay he doesn’t need to do if he makes that conscious decision not to come into London. He’ll still be earning and his relatively modern vehicles won’t be killing people where they’ll be working.
It will however mean there’s less people doing his work in London which pushes prices up, more pressure and all manner of things….some of which many will see as a positive.
When I am in town these days I find myself being such a wistful old bstard thinking “back in my day” like some scornful version of Uncle Albert. It’s such a changed place with so much control, pressure, aggression and the obvious hugely inflated prices.
I am old |
Must be an age thing. I choose to go into central London most days rather than working from home. All the pubs, bars, restaurants etc. Best city in the world imo.
Got rid of my car a few years ago as I was barely using it and find it easier to get around town using public transport. I’ve actually found myself going into central a lot more with the family at weekends.
One last point that I’ve not seen mentioned on this thread is the reduction in noise at nighttime since ULEZ was introduced. Fewer noisy motors racing around late at night waking people up. An unexpected positive, for me anyway. | | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 14:30 - Sep 2 with 925 views | kensalriser |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 11:18 - Sep 2 by Lblock |
You know the bit where I say “was one of the factors”…..did you miss that bit?
Why should he upgrade his fleet? That’s a capital outlay he doesn’t need to do if he makes that conscious decision not to come into London. He’ll still be earning and his relatively modern vehicles won’t be killing people where they’ll be working.
It will however mean there’s less people doing his work in London which pushes prices up, more pressure and all manner of things….some of which many will see as a positive.
When I am in town these days I find myself being such a wistful old bstard thinking “back in my day” like some scornful version of Uncle Albert. It’s such a changed place with so much control, pressure, aggression and the obvious hugely inflated prices.
I am old |
It's all good then. He can find work elsewhere and someone else with presumably ULEZ compliant vehicles will step in to fill the gap. Sounds like ULEZ doing what it's supposed to.
As for central London getting more expensive, that's a multi-decade trend for almost all major cities worldwide. Wouldn't it be a positive thing if the economy diversified geographically to become less reliant on London? |  |
| |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 15:30 - Sep 2 with 867 views | loftupper |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 11:18 - Sep 2 by Lblock |
You know the bit where I say “was one of the factors”…..did you miss that bit?
Why should he upgrade his fleet? That’s a capital outlay he doesn’t need to do if he makes that conscious decision not to come into London. He’ll still be earning and his relatively modern vehicles won’t be killing people where they’ll be working.
It will however mean there’s less people doing his work in London which pushes prices up, more pressure and all manner of things….some of which many will see as a positive.
When I am in town these days I find myself being such a wistful old bstard thinking “back in my day” like some scornful version of Uncle Albert. It’s such a changed place with so much control, pressure, aggression and the obvious hugely inflated prices.
I am old |
Isn't complying with regulations as they change the cost of doing business. We have had to open a new office in the EU (Malta in this case) simply to continue operating in that market post Brexit. Extra costs for no extra benefit except to continue what we were doing previously.
As others had said though, I am sure someone else will pick up the business, so no loss for Londoners |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 15:38 - Sep 2 with 857 views | themodfather |
firstly i do not drive. if we need and want clean air in LOndon it must be the whole of it not sections.
now drivers get hammered, at the pumps, mot, insurance, road tax etc but please don't cry poverty over ULEZ a car is a luxury item, not a must have , BUT I MUST SAY the mayor is following tory policy from the last COP 27? and has to do it as he needs money from central government , he is getting the flak .
but HE SHOULD ALSO focus on the disgusting clouds of dust in tube tunnels and sorting that out, it is proven the crap down there is worse than at street level. the tube have few and they are far between vent shafts , some don't work! and for cleaner and cooler air it needs modern ones and more of them. some stations are so bad with clouds of dust you can't see the end of the platform! | | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 16:48 - Sep 2 with 837 views | denhamhoop2 |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 22:55 - Sep 1 by loftupper |
I agree, why is it expected that city's should continually take on the responsibility of a growing population.
I suspect that local interest groups coupled with MP's make it too difficult to consider building anywhere else other than London. |
You pay a premium to not have to mix with hoi polloi and enjoy nice clean air and space in the countryside | | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 17:22 - Sep 2 with 810 views | Esox_Lucius |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 12:05 - Sep 2 by Ned_Kennedys |
Have you read that link properly?
A 2020 letter about the 2021 ULËZ expansion to the North and South Circulars: nothing about the 2023 expansion out into the countryside. |
it was to demonstrate who is driving the agenda. It was Johnson's baby to start with and supported by the Tory government. Khan is under pressure to conform with government, NOT conservative MP's, who have many against it, or forfeit his funding for TfL.
I agree with just about everyone that it is a wasted effort and even their own reports show this but I disagree with the target for the vitriol.
I wouldn't even put it past Labour's National Executive Committee to have had a hand in this either. Sir Kid Starver is no traditional Labour leader by any definition. In our recent local council elections our traditionally Conservative council was beaten into 2nd by Labour whose leader had already sat down with Lib Dems to form a working majority leadership but at the 23rd hour pulled out of it and refused to answer questions why. The Lib Dem leader in our council claimed it was due to influence from Labour's NEC and the labour leader refused to either deny or confirm it.
IMO the Conservative party are more UKIP these days and the Labour party is a clone of the old Conservative party. | |
| The grass is always greener. |
| |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 18:10 - Sep 2 with 763 views | Juzzie |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 11:26 - Sep 1 by StanFan |
And then there's bus lanes. All of them on the way to my Mum's are Monday-Friday except about 10 yards. Another very profitable wheeze. Not sure how you are meant to read all the little blue signs while driving and checking speed limits (20mph or 30mph), other road signs, pedestrians and other drivers.
No wonder most people don't drive in bus lanes even when they can, which creates yet more congestion. |
Got caught in a bus lane in Wimbledon just prior to the pre season game there. It was all of 50ft long and as you approach it it just looks like a bus stop, not really a full on mile long bus lane and there didn’t seem any reason why a car can’t drive through, it’s not holding anyone up.
Yes, there were signs it transpires but I’m trying to drive and not rear end someone because I’m looking left at the pavement all the time trying not to do something I’m seemingly not meant to do.
Maybe it’ll be cheaper in the long run if i just keep rear ending people.
Plus, as said, i see so many empty bus lanes during the hours you can use them because understandably people are schit scared of getting it wrong because it’s so confusing so you end up with traffic queues (Goldhawk Road westbound at 7pm a prime example) that could be avoided.
Well done planners, well fking done.
[Post edited 2 Sep 2023 18:14]
|  | | |
| London ULEZ, who can afford it now on 18:35 - Sep 2 with 736 views | Arty |
It's no going to end with ULEZ
Sadiq Khan’s Green Globalist Gang Suggests Daily 44g Meat Allowance and Rations Lower Than Second World War
BY CHRIS MORRISON 31 AUGUST 2023 9:00 AM
London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s Ulez punch-down on cars and vans owned by the less affluent is just one example of the attacks planned against town dwellers living in modern industrial societies. Khan is the current chairman of C40, a global network of city mayors backed by numerous hard-Left billionaire foundations. Removing cars from cities is just one of its aims. In a Headline Report published by the group in 2019 and re-emphasised earlier this year, a “progressive” target for 2030 was set of a daily per person allowance of 44g of meat (enough for two small meatballs), a daily limit of 2,500 calories, (less than the ration in the Second World War), one short haul flight every three years, eight new clothing items a year and private cars available for only one in five people. This “pioneering piece of thought leadership” was said to seek a “radical, and rapid, shift in consumption patterns”.
When the report about future urban consumption was first published in 2019, it received little publicity in the media. Some of its proposals looked a bit cranky even for mainstream publications. For instance, under an “ambitious” 2030 target, the mayors looked to ban meat and private vehicles altogether. But groundwork was clearly being laid. Mark Watts, executive director of C40, observed that average consumption-based emissions in the wealthier C40 cities must fall by “two thirds or more” by 2030. It was said that reducing vehicle ownership would lead to significant reclamation of roads and 25,000 kms of cycle lanes. This plan is now well advance since the Covid lockdowns provided cover for mass street closures. Recent years have also seen large increases in cycle lanes, and of course the Ulez war on those driving older vehicles, not necessarily by choice.
Signatory cities are committed to “high impact accelerators”, which include creating low or zero emissions zones along with “implanting vehicle restrictions or financial incentives/disincentives such as road use or parking charges”. An early sighting here, perhaps of Khan’s suspected wish to implement road pricing after his Ulez infrastructure is in place.
There is also an early sighting of unsourced statistics with a claim that eating less meat and more vegetables and fruit could prevent 160,000 annual deaths associated with diseases such as heart attacks, diabetes and strokes in C40 cities. It is not immediately clear if these deaths actually occur in such precise numbers, or whether they are a Ulez-style ‘statistical construct‘.
Over 100 cities around the world are part of the C40 network and they are required to sign up to “performance-based requirements” based on a number of leadership standards. One of these standards specifies that they must innovate and start taking inclusive and resilient action, “to address emissions beyond the direct control of city government, such as associated with goods and services consumed in their city”. The largely unpublicised C40 operation is backed by finance and support from many well-known green foundations including Climate Works, Hewlett, IKEA, Oak, FR and Clinton. Three “strategic funders” are identified including Christopher Hohn’s Children’s Investment Fund Foundation, a major financial contributor to Extinction Rebellion. Another strategic funder is Bloomberg Philanthropies, whose controller Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York, is president of the C40 board.
Of course interest is now growing in what all these people have been smoking over the last few years, as the Con/Lab green blob (different countries, different mainstream political combinations) organise to de-industrialise and cut human progress in the name of tackling a supposed ‘climate crisis’. The C40 Headline Report gives clear guidance of the scale of economic and societal change required under a collectivist Net Zero agenda. U.K. Fires is an academic project funded by the British Government, and it also gives a brutal assessment of life under what it terms absolute net zero carbon dioxide emissions. Again it is not discussed much in the public prints, but the Daily Sceptic has reported on its findings. These include no flying and shipping by 2050, drastic cuts in home heating, bans on beef and lamb consumption and a ruthless purge of traditional building materials such as bricks, glass, steel and cement. Such is the admirable honesty on display in their reports that they note these building materials can be replaced with “rammed earth” – mud huts for the lower classes in other words.
Sadiq Khan has been badly shaken by a popular uprising against his hated Ulez scheme. Backing in his own Labour party is wearing thin, not because most senior members are particularly anti-Ulez, but because after the Uxbridge by-election they can see a little more clearly that attacking the cars of the poor is a slam-dunk vote loser. For his part, Khan seems to have become more hysterical attacking those who oppose Ulez as conspiracy theorists. Earlier this year, reports the Daily Mail, Khan said that some of those who opposed the scheme’s growth across all London boroughs were “anti-vaxxers, Covid deniers, conspiracy theorists and Nazis”.
The evidence provide by Khan’s own C40 Headline Report, along with the work of U.K. Fires, shows clearly the actual agenda that is now being ruthlessly deployed. The only conspiracy rabbithole in sight would appear to be that occupied by a freaked Mayor Sadiq Khan.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
