Great, good job air traffic never routinely 'stack' the inbound flights circling over all the new London ulez boroughs then. Otherwise tonnes of toxins would be dumped all over them. Heathrow itself of course is bang inside the new ulez zone and all the residents nearby will now enjoy clean air for their kids because they have new cars.Nope.
Uxbridge is north of Heathrow. Not on the flight path
Nice try, but the Heathrow stacks are more over green belt than London boroughs.Great, good job air traffic never routinely 'stack' the inbound flights circling over all the new London ulez boroughs then. Otherwise tonnes of toxins would be dumped all over them. Heathrow itself of course is bang inside the new ulez zone and all the residents nearby will now enjoy clean air for their kids because they have new cars.
Sorry no air traffic over the ulez zone? Lol. It's one of the busiest bits of sky in the world. There is a small wedge of airspace that is clear of Heathrow traffic around Uxbridge as you say - a fairly neat wedge from the other side of the A40. I wonder what for....Nice try, but the Heathrow stacks are more over green belt than London boroughs.
None of that really matters unless you're talking about noise pollution. Aircraft fly in the air and air moves around so it's irrelevant where they are.Great, good job air traffic never routinely 'stack' the inbound flights circling over all the new London ulez boroughs then. Otherwise tonnes of toxins would be dumped all over them. Heathrow itself of course is bang inside the new ulez zone and all the residents nearby will now enjoy clean air for their kids because they have new cars.
Only 10% of people living in Uxbridge drive non ULEZ compliant vehicles. All diesel cars registered after September 2015 (although, in practice, many registered before that date are fine as well) and petrol cars registered after 2005 are all compliant. So it’s only the most polluting vehicles they‘re talking about.Ulez itself is fine for all the reasons you suggest. The issue is the speed of the expansion at a time when people do not have the money to replace their cars.
Yes, concentrated in The underground, but can't even begin to think what that must be like when they were steam powered. I'm not actually against ulez, I just think it should be more gradually and intelligently introduced. Probably nationwide too unless anyone thinks there is a magic forcefield around the M25 that means it's ok outside of it. In reality we are all moving to greener vehicles anyway as old cars die and newer ones are bought - that's not going to make the London mayor any money though.None of that really matters unless you're talking about noise pollution. Aircraft fly in the air and air moves around so it's irrelevant where they are.
The stacks are set to reduce noise impact above all else. Aircraft produce the most pollution on takeoff whereas the engines tend to be at lower speeds on approach. There are local pollution and noise sensors at airports for this reason as operators have to reduce takeoff engine speeds wherever possible.
Look at any pollution map of the area near an airport, it's always worse directly around the takeoff runway but relatively non-existent elsewhere.
The worst I've seen for pollution in London is on the underground. I had to go to London for work last Tuesday and I only took a few trips on the underground but afterwards my nose was pouring out and full of black gunk.
Yes, the poorest people.Only 10% of people living in Uxbridge drive non ULEZ compliant vehicles. All diesel cars registered after September 2015 (although, in practice, many registered before that date are fine as well) and petrol cars registered before 2005 are all compliant. So it’s only the most polluting vehicles they‘re talking about.
The very ones most likely to be affected by ill health from pollution. Also, they’re the most likely demographic to smoke and fags now cost, on average £14.49 a pack but nobody is trying to get elected by suggesting free fags..Yes, the poorest people.
Yes, the poorest people.
I think there are a similar amount supporting it just because of other propaganda. But back to the point - it just lost labour a by-election.I suspect there’s a significant number of people who don’t realise that the ULEZ won’t actually affect them because they’ve not checked and are instinctively against it because they believe the propaganda. When it come in and they realise it’s costing them nothing the issue will go away.
I think there are a similar amount supporting it just because of other propaganda. But back to the point - it just lost labour a by-election.
Yes, there is certainly a possibility that they along with Hillingdon/ruislip would basically vote for anything with a blue rosette on it, but John MacDonald is only down the road in hayes and he does ok. I think it's an opportunity lost although to reduce it from a safe to a marginal seat is something I suppose. There are a lot of these local pocket issues that could become a banana skin for Starmer in the ge though if he's complacent.A constituency which has always been Tory and was created from two constituencies that were always Tory (or unionist) apart a brief time after the war.
A constituency that voted 57% leave and has a large number of people who are far more likely to believe GB News style propaganda.
Yes, and the other point is that the next election will be after ULEZ comes in and it will no longer be an issue except to maybe 5% of constituents who have kept their old diesel cars.I think there are a similar amount supporting it just because of other propaganda. But back to the point - it just lost labour a by-election.
I don't think it's even ulez itself that's got people's backs up, more the deafness of the mayor.Yes, and the other point is that the next election will be after ULEZ comes in and it will no longer be an issue except to maybe 5% of constituents who have kept their old diesel cars.
Expanding or even sustaining any form of ULEZ is moronic whilst public transport is facing total ruin. Right now it's getting more and more expensive to use the alternatives such as the train and that's if it runs at all.I suspect there’s a significant number of people who don’t realise that the ULEZ won’t actually affect them because they’ve not checked and are instinctively against it because they believe the propaganda. When it come in and they realise it’s costing them nothing the issue will go away.
What, so the inbound flights do donuts over Uxbridge for 20 minutes and then land at right angles to the runway?Great, good job air traffic never routinely 'stack' the inbound flights circling over all the new London ulez boroughs then. Otherwise tonnes of toxins would be dumped all over them. Heathrow itself of course is bang inside the new ulez zone and all the residents nearby will now enjoy clean air for their kids because they have new cars.
Yes, there is certainly a possibility that they along with Hillingdon/ruislip would basically vote for anything with a blue rosette on it, but John MacDonald is only down the road in hayes and he does ok. I think it's an opportunity lost although to reduce it from a safe to a marginal seat is something I suppose. There are a lot of these local pocket issues that could become a banana skin for Starmer in the ge though if he's complacent.
Yes, pretty much sums it up. However a lot of the young aspirational/business owning Asian vote goes Tory too I think as they still regard the conservatives as the friends of said aspiration and business.John Macdonnell's constituency Hayes and Harlington voted 78% remain and has been traded back and forth between Labour and Tories since the 70s . It's a marginal seat where Macdonnell has established himself as a constituency servant.
Uxbridge and Ruislip until very recently due to the Eton Mess was a Safe Tory seat.
Without checking census figures but having been in both, I'm quite confident it's less old and less white, and less gammon.
The ULEZ issue was just a way for them to still vote Tory.A constituency which has always been Tory and was created from two constituencies that were always Tory (or unionist) apart a brief time after the war.
A constituency that voted 57% leave and has a large number of people who are far more likely to believe GB News style propaganda.