T-Charge: New London traffic charge comes into force

[Chippy_Tea]

Yet again the low paid who cannot afford a modern car get hit in the pocket.

Drivers of older, more polluting vehicles will have to pay almost twice as much to drive in central London.
Mayor Sadiq Khan's £10 T-Charge, which mainly applies to diesel and petrol vehicles registered before 2006, has come into force.
It covers the same area as the existing congestion charge zone, bumping up the cost to £21.50 for those affected.
Opponents said the scheme would "disproportionately penalise London's poorest drivers".
The measure is the latest attempt by Mr Khan to improve air quality in the capital and according to the mayor's office, will impact 34,000 motorists a month.
More - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-41695116

 

[Dexter101]

Not sure how anyone afforded to drive in London before this!

I drive a 2.4L petrol car from 2003 but I wouldn't ever drive into London anyway.

The only benefit this has is forcing more and more people to use the already crowded underground system.

Surely it would be far better to incentivise people to do this by lowering tube prices rather than force people who have to drive because they don't have a choice (thinking workmen with vans etc) to pay more money to do their jobs.

 

[Ajhutch]

I'd like to see the evidence that the charge hits poorer drivers hardest. There are several intuitive reasons I can think of for why it would be false.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GhostShip]

It will hit the poorest and doesn't begin to tackle other sources of city pollution.

And the saddest thing of all? There will be a small positive impact on pollution and probably a reduction in accidents because less people are driving into London and that will be enough for that pitiful excuse for a London Mayor to claim the plaudits and seek another four years.

 

[MyQul]

I'd like to see the evidence that the charge hits poorer drivers hardest. There are several intuitive reasons I can think of for why it would be false.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Such as? I'm not looking for an argument here, I'm genuinely interested.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

I'd like to see the evidence that the charge hits poorer drivers hardest.

I imagine the majority of drivers who are driving a 2006 or older car are not doing so because they have plenty of money in the bank but do not want to spend it on a modern car.

.

 

[Dexter101]

I don't think it will actually reduce traffic at all. If someone is going to pay £12 to drive into London, they will probably pay £22. Its still cheaper than a return train fare.

Last time my wife and I went into London, it cost us £40 return and we had to get the rail replacement bus service...

If I was happy driving into London, £22 is still more affordable than public transport.

So it basically just means that London are getting more pounds in taxes.

 

[Ajhutch]

Such as? I'm not looking for an argument here, I'm genuinely interested.

I'll give this a go, but it may be a long post. I'll say up front, I don't have facts here, purely intuition. But the "critics" in the story Chippy linked to don't have facts either, so its my intuition against theirs!

So, to pay the Congestion charge, you have to drive into, out of, within or through a relatively small area of Central London. I'll try to take the cases one by one.

Into (ie live outside the zone, work in it)
- The vast majority of people who do travel to work in the zone will use public transport. I don't have a source but just looking at tube usage and London's terminal train stations I feel confident stating this as a fact. There's an argument to be had about access to public transport but it isn't relevant to the Congestion charge
- Workmen driving vans to building sites are by definition working on some of the most expensive properties in the UK. If they aren't able to pass on the congestion charge to their customers (who own these very expensive properties) then they damn well should. I have paid for parking permits for builders, as an analogy here. If workmen are working on a commercial building they have probably been either employed or sub contracted and they should be able to pass the cost onto the ultimate customer who will be a fat cat land developer or a corporate
- City fat cats who have access to one of the very few private parking spaces or use one of the very expensive public parking spaces in the congestion charge zone are clearly not in the demographic "poorest drivers".

Out of (ie live inside the zone, work outside)
- Property prices inside the congestion charge zone are incredibly high. Anyone who owns a property there with access to a private parking space owns a very very valuable asset and therefore wouldn't fall into the demographic "poorest drivers". Affordable housing (where one may fall into the demographic) is highly unlikely to have access to a parking space (EDIT STARTS HERE) however I acknowledge that people who do happen to have access to such a space are the most likely to be counterexamples to my arguments here (EDIT ENDS HERE).
- Driving to such a job would generally be much slower than taking public transport.

Within (ie live and work within the congestion charge zone)
- A combination of arguments from the previous two points would stand.

Through (ie live south of the zone and work north of it)
- Trying to do this journey during congestion charge hours by road would be really really slow, I'd be fascinated to see numbers on how many people actually do it

 

[MyQul]

I'll give this a go, but it may be a long post. I'll say up front, I don't have facts here, purely intuition. But the "critics" in the story Chippy linked to don't have facts either, so its my intuition against theirs!

So, to pay the Congestion charge, you have to drive into, out of, within or through a relatively small area of Central London. I'll try to take the cases one by one.

Into (ie live outside the zone, work in it)
- The vast majority of people who do travel to work in the zone will use public transport. I don't have a source but just looking at tube usage and London's terminal train stations I feel confident stating this as a fact. There's an argument to be had about access to public transport but it isn't relevant to the Congestion charge
- Workmen driving vans to building sites are by definition working on some of the most expensive properties in the UK. If they aren't able to pass on the congestion charge to their customers (who own these very expensive properties) then they damn well should. I have paid for parking permits for builders, as an analogy here. If workmen are working on a commercial building they have probably been either employed or sub contracted and they should be able to pass the cost onto the ultimate customer who will be a fat cat land developer or a corporate
- City fat cats who have access to one of the very few private parking spaces or use one of the very expensive public parking spaces in the congestion charge zone are clearly not in the demographic "poorest drivers".

Out of (ie live inside the zone, work outside)
- Property prices inside the congestion charge zone are incredibly high. Anyone who owns a property there with access to a private parking space owns a very very valuable asset and therefore wouldn't fall into the demographic "poorest drivers". Affordable housing (where one may fall into the demographic) is highly unlikely to have access to a parking space.
- Driving to such a job would generally be much slower than taking public transport.

Within (ie live and work within the congestion charge zone)
- A combination of arguments from the previous two points would stand.

Through (ie live south of the zone and work north of it)
- Trying to do this journey during congestion charge hours by road would be really really slow, I'd be fascinated to see numbers on how many people actually do it

Some interesting arguments their AJ. :thumb:

I dont really have a dog in this fight as I get around by public transport/bike/shank's pony

 

[Dexter101]

I dont really have a dog in this fight as I get around by public transport/bike/shank's pony

Think ponies come under a higher tax due to methane released. Shetland ponies are exempt based on their size.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

I don't think it will actually reduce traffic at all.

It probably wont make much difference like putting the price of fags and booze up in the budget doesn't it just makes them more money.

.

 

[MyQul]

Think ponies come under a higher tax due to methane released. Shetland ponies are exempt based on their size.

My shank's pony is probably due for a massive tax bill if that's the case, due to all the home brew consumed

 

[Ajhutch]

Some interesting arguments their AJ. :thumb:

I dont really have a dog in this fight as I get around by public transport/bike/shank's pony

Yeh me too, our car is used locally and for longer journeys out of London. I've never driven through the city


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Fil]

I would suggest that the folk to whom every penny counts will not be driving into central london anyway, they will be exercising better judgement and be parking in the side streets of a satellite tube station, (Ruslip or Uxbridge always worked for me..) and be tubing in for the last hour or so of the commute.

 

[simon12]

I'll give this a go, but it may be a long post. I'll say up front, I don't have facts here, purely intuition. But the "critics" in the story Chippy linked to don't have facts either, so its my intuition against theirs!

So, to pay the Congestion charge, you have to drive into, out of, within or through a relatively small area of Central London. I'll try to take the cases one by one.

Into (ie live outside the zone, work in it)
- The vast majority of people who do travel to work in the zone will use public transport. I don't have a source but just looking at tube usage and London's terminal train stations I feel confident stating this as a fact. There's an argument to be had about access to public transport but it isn't relevant to the Congestion charge
- Workmen driving vans to building sites are by definition working on some of the most expensive properties in the UK. If they aren't able to pass on the congestion charge to their customers (who own these very expensive properties) then they damn well should. I have paid for parking permits for builders, as an analogy here. If workmen are working on a commercial building they have probably been either employed or sub contracted and they should be able to pass the cost onto the ultimate customer who will be a fat cat land developer or a corporate
- City fat cats who have access to one of the very few private parking spaces or use one of the very expensive public parking spaces in the congestion charge zone are clearly not in the demographic "poorest drivers".

Out of (ie live inside the zone, work outside)
- Property prices inside the congestion charge zone are incredibly high. Anyone who owns a property there with access to a private parking space owns a very very valuable asset and therefore wouldn't fall into the demographic "poorest drivers". Affordable housing (where one may fall into the demographic) is highly unlikely to have access to a parking space (EDIT STARTS HERE) however I acknowledge that people who do happen to have access to such a space are the most likely to be counterexamples to my arguments here (EDIT ENDS HERE).
- Driving to such a job would generally be much slower than taking public transport.

Within (ie live and work within the congestion charge zone)
- A combination of arguments from the previous two points would stand.

Through (ie live south of the zone and work north of it)
- Trying to do this journey during congestion charge hours by road would be really really slow, I'd be fascinated to see numbers on how many people actually do it

This means most people paying the charge are people that can afford it, it still hits (as with any fixed charge/tax) poorer people harder.

 

[simon12]

I hate driving inside the M25, furthest I have ever driven into London is St Georges hospital in Tooting.

 

[Ajhutch]

This means most people paying the charge are people that can afford it, it still hits (as with any fixed charge/tax) poorer people harder.

The change impacts more greatly on the poorer individual user than on the richer individual user, of course that's true and you rightly highlight that it's true of any fixed cost charge (TV license for example or VAT on pants or whatever). But I tried to lay out a (heavily caveated) theory that in this case an overwhelming amount of the impacted people are rich (unlike the users of a TV or pants). VAT is hugely regressive because everyone has to pay it and poorer people are worst affected, but I suspect (another caveat) poorer people are the edge cases in respect of the congestion charge and in that sense it could be argued to be progressive. Really we shouldn't be trying to analyse it as a tax anyway, it's really an attempt to stop people driving in Central London.

 

[Ajhutch]

I hate driving inside the M25, furthest I have ever driven into London is St Georges hospital in Tooting.

You're brave to even drive that far, parking is an absolute nightmare!

 

[simon12]

You're brave to even drive that far, parking is an absolute nightmare!

But I hate getting the train as well, last time I did it parking was not to bad just expensive, not as much as the train though.