View Single Post
  #5   Report Post  
Old February 3rd 09, 08:31 PM posted to uk.transport.london
Mizter T Mizter T is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: May 2005
Posts: 6,077
Default LEZ phase 3 for vans and minibuses scrapped - Boris has no balls


On 3 Feb, 20:29, "Chris Read" wrote:

"Mizter T" wrote:

---quote---
Van emission charge plan halted
Plans to extend a scheme preventing high polluting vehicles entering
London have been shelved by the city's mayor.
An expansion of London's Low Emission Zone (LEZ) would have seen
owners of heavily polluting vans and minibuses fined up to £500 a day
by October 2010.
Mayor Boris Johnson pulled the plug as he said it could damage
businesses already suffering in the recession.
Green Party London Assembly member Darren Johnson said it was
"condemning Londoners to more premature deaths".

[...]
The next phase would require owners of smaller vehicles such as vans
and minibuses to meet the same standards.


Good news. Small businesses don't need further financial burdens at this
time.

Presumably Darren Johnson is unconcerned with the emissions caused by the
vehicle manufacturing industry, and the 'premature deaths' this causes.

The best way to reduce pollution is to reduce consumption. You don't do that
by (effectively) condemning serviceable vehicles to the automotive graveyard
and insisting struggling businesses buy new ones.

Chris


As I'm sure you either know or are capable of guessing Darren Johnson
is concerned with the whole horizon of emissions (to coin a rather
terrible phrase), including those from the vehicle manufacturing
industry.

It's a good point of course, but some of the I've come across about
replacing old equipment for new, more efficient and less emitting kit
is rather surprising in the way it often comes down in favour of the
new - taking into account so many years of the old kit continuing to
be used in its less efficient and more emitting glory. Sorry to be so
unspecific but I'm talking in a broad brush way about many fields.

The way you put 'premature deaths' in inverted commas as opposed to
full quotation could suggest you doubt the logic behind that statement
- do you?

Nonetheless, good to have a different take on this, particularly
regarding the small businesses. I obviously don't agree that it's
"good news", but I can see that it could be something of a burden on
small businesses. I just think I would prioritise it over these
concerns - harsh perhaps, but there you go - likewise I think it's
harsh that Londoners could have had cleaner air were it not for the
extension of this scheme being scrapped.