In message , at 21:11:51 on Fri, 16 Oct
2020, tim... remarked:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 17:06:48 on Fri, 16 Oct
2020, tim... remarked:
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/tran...haun-bailey-ra
lly-against-extension-of-congestion-charge-zone-a4571826.html

Other media available

As a disinterested party, I can't believe that anyone is seriously
suggesting this

The N/S Circular area isn't like the central area where everyone
inside it is moderately well off, or lives in a bubble where they can
walk/bus to whatever service that they need.

People who live in the "Circular" area, are people in normal
employment with lives that mean that they have to have a car.

and an annual tax of 5,475 pounds to own one, is bloody ridiculous

That's only if you use it every day.

If the local councillors suggested this they would be out on their
ears at the next election

It's only because Boris is a Tory, and most of the affected LAs are
Labour/LibDem run that he has a hope of getting away with this
politically

This will be seen as the Mayor's fault, so Labour will get the flack.

but it's still a bag of nonsense socially.

It's nothing to do with congestion, but simply a potential way to
raise a poll-tax the pay for TfL's huge deficit.

we know that

but why should car owners in this zone pay for it?

One reason is that they are (like it or not) under Tfl's umbrella, and
so are one of the more direct sources of income. Rather than for example
imposing a council tax surcharge on everyone in London.

Another is that if TfL has to drastically cut services it'll force more
vehicles onto the roads, inconveniencing existing motorists.

It's PT uses that benefited from the fare freeze, they should be paying
for that mistake

Putting up fares won't solve the deficit (especially in the current
pandemic).
--
Roland Perry