View Single Post
  #9   Report Post  
Old December 10th 18, 01:33 PM posted to
Recliner[_3_] Recliner[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Oct 2014
Posts: 2,920
Default Sadiq's looming poll tax moment

On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:11:04 +0000, Roland Perry

In message , at 09:56:31 on Mon, 10 Dec
2018, remarked:
On Sun, 9 Dec 2018 17:15:08 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:35:56 on Sun, 9 Dec 2018,
Billy Bum Bandit No Mates remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:23:54 on Sun, 9 Dec 2018,
Billy Bum Bandit No Mates remarked:

"the charge, levied on older and more polluting vehicles...
applies to nearly all diesel cars and vans licensed before
September 2015"

In other words, not just "older" ones, but almost all that aren't
effectively brand new. And of course the ones which escape the charge
are precisely the generation where some manufacturers were recently
caught fiddling the testing.

If they were genuinely wanting this charge to persuade people to buy/use
less-polluting vehicles, it should have been set for diesels at the
previous 2009 Euro-5 standard, because not everyone can afford to scrap
their three year old car.

Yes, this is turning into a hefty stealth tax, affecting far more vehicles
and their owners than was previously recognised. As you say, other than the
newest models, practically all diesels would incur the daily tax.

Although I don't drive inside the M25 very much (mainly rat-runs around
accident blockages on the M25) I might have not so willingly recently
bought a Euro-4 diesel car if a Euro-5 one would have been OK according
to the mayor.

All the mayors idiotic tax will achieve is sending perfectly good cars to
the scrapheap too early

I really don't think anyone is going to scrap a 2013 car because of this

which - if they're replaced - will released a whole
lot more pollution into the atmosphere. That and a huge rise in the number of
cloned and foreign plates being used inside the zone which coupled with the
total lack of traffic police these days will just lead to people taking the

All this because of his dogmatic attachment to his no rise in fares policy
and the screwup that is crossrail.

People inside the cordon would not have very often passed the cordon
[outbound] in their normal lives, and hence would rarely have had to

Unlike with the congestion charge zone, this new zone won't have just an in/out
line you can avoid.

And I was describing the Cambridge congestion charge, not London's

Even if you start your journey in the zone and never leave it you'll
still apparently be caught by ANPR (presumably yet to be installed) and

I was mainly addressing Recliner's comment that his car dealership was
just inside the [London] cordon. Which suggests he's starting just

The garage is perhaps a quarter of a mile inside the zone. I live a
few miles away, outside the zone. You don't get Jaguar main dealers in
every borough.

While there does have to be some line drawn on the map, it's
disproportionate that someone whose errands takes them as little as
perhaps a mile inside on an irregular basis should be charged as much as
someone driving for hours inside.

Accidental experiments, in Cambridge again, appear to show that people
will go to considerable lengths to avoid paying quite small fees for
parking (or petrol at 1p/litre cheaper).

Getting back to other modes of transport for a moment, what if one of
the radial railways suffers a glitch, and people at a station just
inside the cordon where the trains have ground to a halt, start phoning
home (maybe one station beyond the cordon) for a lift, then this stealth
tax on the rescue mission is going to grate severely.

Yes, there will be many such examples.

Going back to one of your earlier suggestions, it might be more
tolerable if the system was smart enough to allow a small number of
free visits by any vehicle to the zone (say, two per month), and only
imposed a charge after that was exceeded. It would ensure that people
regularly driving in the zone invested in clean vehicles, but rare
visitors weren't impeded.