congestion charge NO campaign

[stonerblue]

[quote="GaudinoWhy do you beleive that the filthy public transport we have now, including the trams, will magically be transformed into clean ones simply because they will be 'new'? And if you truly also believe that it's only 'one or two people in the middle of nowhere', you are mistaken. I could live within half a mile of a super dooper new tram stop, and STILL you won't be seeing my missus walking there at 5am. Unless I missed the bit of the plan where the council are employing Judge Dredd to also sort all the scum off our streets too?
The congestion charge, as said previously, is simply another money making tax, dressed up to look 'green'. And DOESN'T solve the problems of traffic in Manchester, simply because as much as you don't want to see it, it isn't practical for many.

By 'clean' i meant, 'spits out less shit than car exhausts'. And your missus can drive wherever she likes at 5am 'cos the plan is to start charging at 7am.

PMSL!![/quote]

i'm here all week....

 

[philphenol]

Despite being told it is just hearsay. I repeat, I work in London and have seen and experienced the effects first hand. It has not worked on any level, transit times through the zone and traffic levels are back to where they were. This is nothing more than a tax

FACTS

More than five years after the Congestion Charge was launched, and over a year after the western extension began, traffic in central London remains 21 per cent lower than pre-charge levels and traffic entering the extension has fallen by 14 per cent.

The figures contained within Transport for London's (TfL's) Sixth Annual Impacts Monitoring Report mean that 70,000 fewer cars enter the original zone each day compared to pre-charging levels, and 30,000 fewer cars enter the western extension.

However, the report also reveals that decreasing levels of road space in both the original and western zones has caused congestion to return to levels experienced before the charge was introduced.

A widespread programme of water and gas main replacement works has greatly reduced the road capacity in both zones, as have various traffic management measures to assist pedestrians and other road users.

TfL's assessments indicate that one of the biggest current contributory factors within the western extension is a major property development at the Scotch House Corner junction in Knightsbridge.

Improving traffic flow
The temporary works associated with this development have reduced road capacity at this key junction by up to half, and had a negative impact on traffic in the area.

Traffic signals have since been adjusted at the junction to ease traffic flow, and TfL has altered loading and unloading bays and bus stopping arrangements to help the situation.

TfL is meeting with the developers fortnightly to discuss how best to mitigate the effects of the works.

In response to the increase in congestion levels, Mayor of London Boris Johnson has asked TfL to accelerate the delivery of his plans to improve traffic flow.

Careful planning
These include:

The Mayor has asked TfL to deliver a plan for the re-phasing of traffic signals to get traffic flowing more smoothly, without prejudice to the needs of pedestrians and vulnerable road users. The Mayor expects to review TfL's proposals this autumn
The Mayor is exercising new powers that came into force in May 2008 to fine utility companies that cause delays through badly planned work, and is seeking greater powers to control their activities which he expects to be introduced in the first boroughs by the end of the financial year
Work is underway with Thames Water focused on reducing the impact of the works they need to do to repair and replace the miles of Victorian water mains in the Capital. TfL is now working closely with them on the use of steel plating to cover excavations when work is not in progress and a joint project team has been formed to work on its implementation
The Mayor has asked TfL to bring forward plans to allow motorbikes to ride in bus lanes, and expects the first lanes to open later this year
TfL is now reviewing all major schemes that could reduce the capacity of the road network, with a view to minimizing the impact on traffic flow
TfL is currently developing plans for the introduction of a Paris-style bike hire scheme which is expected to encourage more Londoners to leave their cars at home
The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, said: 'I have always thought that the Congestion Charge is a blunt instrument.

'It has proved successful in cutting traffic coming into London but on its own has not resolved the problem of congestion.

'Various works and schemes going on in the Capital have also eroded its impact.

Halting congestion
'I am therefore introducing a more comprehensive approach to easing congestion in London, one that gives greater consideration to how all transport measures impact on the movement of traffic on our roads.

'I have scrapped the CO2 Charge that risked thousands of small cars flooding central London, and have asked Transport for London to bring forward a range of measures to turnaround the trend and halt the squeezing of road space that has continued to worsen congestion.

'These include re-phasing traffic signals, working with utility companies to minimize the impact of their works, and securing powers to fine those that mess up our roads.

'Londoners need and deserve to be able to get around their city without undue delay, and I will be doing my utmost to make sure we achieve this.'

Further improvements
Malcolm Murray-Clark, Managing Director Planning for TfL, said: 'Without the Congestion Charge the traffic problems in London would be much worse.

'However, as a result of other interventions such as utility and construction works, the reduction in road space has had a detrimental impact on congestion levels and is slowing traffic down.

'We are working with the Mayor and his advisors on ways to improve the flow of traffic in the Capital and we are carrying out further work to build up a full picture of the complex reasons for reduced road space and its negative impact on congestion.'

The Congestion Charge generated provisional net revenues of £137m in 2007/08 which will be spent on further improvements to transport across London.

 

[MCFCTrick]

She would have to leave at that time to get to work if she was to use public transport, and assuming no street ratshigh on crack got to her first. And as for the trams being clean, well, not the one I was on last night in town.
It is ANOTHER TAX, and you oh, so 'green' and 'right on' muppets are falling for the councils propaganda and lies. I know of nobody other than a couple of you on here who have been taken in by them, and I think its a forgone vote as a great big NO.
So, eat your lentils, knit some pasta, and get used to the fact, the car is king!!

Think I will go out and sit with the engine running for an hour............

 

[stonerblue]

I suppose i'm in favour of the charge because those smug, anti-smokers sat in their nice warm cars, away from all those scary little kids, who embraced a law that was unjust and unfair will now know what it feels like to have your choices taken away.
Not nice is it?

 

[Matty]

I suppose i'm in favour of the charge because those smug, anti-smokers sat in their nice warm cars, away from all those scary little kids, who embraced a law that was unjust and unfair will now know what it feels like to have your choices taken away.
Not nice is it?

This tired and inaccurate comparison again. I'm not going to get into it again, but suffice to say the use of motor vehicles is a damn sight more important, and necessary, than smoking. Nice to see you're looking at this objectively as opposed to simply making the decision to try and hurt others.

 

[philphenol]

I suppose i'm in favour of the charge because those smug, anti-smokers sat in their nice warm cars, away from all those scary little kids, who embraced a law that was unjust and unfair will now know what it feels like to have your choices taken away.
Not nice is it?

This tired and inaccurate comparison again. I'm not going to get into it again, but suffice to say the use of motor vehicles is a damn sight more important, and necessary, than smoking. Nice to see you're looking at this objectively as opposed to simply making the decision to try and hurt others.

FACTS
The emissions from car exhausts are responsible for more deaths than road accidents, according to World Health Organisation (WHO) research.

Author of the study Dr Carlos Dora explains his findings
A study looking at France, Austria and Switzerland found that the number of people dying from respiratory or cardiovascular problems which could be attributed to car fumes far outweighed the death toll from crashes.

The BBC's Richard Hannford: "Vehicle pollution is responsible for an extra 21,000 deaths" The WHO will now ask 70 environment and health ministers gathering for a conference in London to adopt a new charter on transport policies to reduce the effects of pollution.

Dr Carlos Dora from the WHO European Centre for Environment and Health said: "The growing evidence that air pollution is causing a major health burden adds to effects of road traffic through noise, accidents and barriers to cycling and walking.

Roger Higman, Friends of the Earth: Pollution builds up rapidly to unhealthy levels "We are paying a huge price for this excessive road transport with our money and our health."

The research found that one third of all harmful particulate air pollution was caused by road transport, and that long term exposure to pollution caused an estimated 21,000 premature deaths a year across the three countries.

This is far higher than the 9,947 who died that year as a result of road accidents.

Bill runs into billions

In addition, the researchers calculated that the car fumes caused 300,000 extra cases of bronchitis in children, and 15,000 extra hospital admissions for heart disease made worse by the pollution.

They calculated that the cost of dealing with all this was £27 billion Euros per year - about £16bn.




But a British GP, a former chairman of the GPs in Asthma group, said that while car pollution worsened existing asthma, there was little evidence that it actually caused the condition.

Dr Dermot Ryan, a Loughborough GP, said that the focus should fall instead on cigarette smoking as the primary villain.

"I'm not too sure car pollution is the number one enemy. 400 people a day are dying in this country due to cigarette smoking," he said.

He recalled a recent study that compared the incidence of asthma between Munich, a fairly non-polluted city, and Leipzig, a city with a large degree of particulate-producing heavy industry.

Asthma was found more widespread in Munich, he said.

"It's difficult to prove this cause and effect, whereas we can prove passive smoking is very, very damaging to children, and actually causes asthma."

Pets, cookers and carpets to blame

Studies have linked a number of other factors with childhood asthma, among them not breastfeeding, smoking while pregnant, carpets, gas cookers, and pets.

Roger Higman, of Friends of the Earth, said that it was clear to his organisation that fumes were at least as big a killer as road traffic accidents.

He said: "What this research shows is that air pollution is a serious problem - and should be treated as such.

"A lot of money goes into making cars more safe, but not as much is spent tackling air pollution."

He called for more investment in public transport.

 

[stonerblue]

I suppose i'm in favour of the charge because those smug, anti-smokers sat in their nice warm cars, away from all those scary little kids, who embraced a law that was unjust and unfair will now know what it feels like to have your choices taken away.
Not nice is it?

This tired and inaccurate comparison again. I'm not going to get into it again, but suffice to say the use of motor vehicles is a damn sight more important, and necessary, than smoking. Nice to see you're looking at this objectively as opposed to simply making the decision to try and hurt others.

i know, it's all wrong. I should be making my decision based on the greater good of society and forego my personal wishes or beliefs. Ah, hang on a minute........

essential and necessary use including taxis, people going to hospital and the emergency services are exempt. Low paid workers will get 20% discount and delivery drivers crossing the zone several times a day will pay no more then £10 a day.

Comparing two laws that are/will be unfair for large numbers of the population is completely accurate on the grounds of principle.

 

[philphenol]

She would have to leave at that time to get to work if she was to use public transport, and assuming no street ratshigh on crack got to her first. And as for the trams being clean, well, not the one I was on last night in town.
It is ANOTHER TAX, and you oh, so 'green' and 'right on' muppets are falling for the councils propaganda and lies. I know of nobody other than a couple of you on here who have been taken in by them, and I think its a forgone vote as a great big NO.
So, eat your lentils, knit some pasta, and get used to the fact, the car is king!!

Think I will go out and sit with the engine running for an hour............

This tired and inaccurate comparison again. I'm not going to get into it again, but suffice to say the use of motor vehicles is a damn sight more important, and necessary, than smoking. Nice to see you're looking at this objectively as opposed to simply making the decision to try and hurt others. "Matty"

 

[Goater666]

Quick question to the people that would vote NO.

If they changed it so they only had the inner charging zone and scrapped the outer zone would you change your vote?

 

[Matty]

She would have to leave at that time to get to work if she was to use public transport, and assuming no street ratshigh on crack got to her first. And as for the trams being clean, well, not the one I was on last night in town.
It is ANOTHER TAX, and you oh, so 'green' and 'right on' muppets are falling for the councils propaganda and lies. I know of nobody other than a couple of you on here who have been taken in by them, and I think its a forgone vote as a great big NO.
So, eat your lentils, knit some pasta, and get used to the fact, the car is king!!

Think I will go out and sit with the engine running for an hour............

This tired and inaccurate comparison again. I'm not going to get into it again, but suffice to say the use of motor vehicles is a damn sight more important, and necessary, than smoking. Nice to see you're looking at this objectively as opposed to simply making the decision to try and hurt others. "Matty"

And your point with taking my comment to someone elses post and adding it to the bottom of a post it bears now relation to whatsoever is what exactly?