ULEZ charge in 2021
Discussion
Greenmantle said:
Ice_blue_tvr said:
Khan is a smart guy. He will be giving the met access to the cameras to use for enforcement. So vandalism may get taking more seriously when that comes into play.
At the moment Khan isn’t the Mets favourite person. Obviously doesn’t mean that they will become bed fellows to minimise their own current problems!
Ice_blue_tvr said:
Look at his claims of 4000 deaths due to air pollution. They aren't actual deaths nor attributed to private car emissions.
"In 2020, a landmark coroner’s report made Ella the first person in the world to have air pollution cited as a cause of death."https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/feb/1...
NMNeil said:
"In 2020, a landmark coroner’s report made Ella the first person in the world to have air pollution cited as a cause of death."
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/feb/1...
That's the poor child who had something like 20 emergency trips to hospital in the last few years of her life but the local authority wouldn't House the family away from the main road and a busy junction despite knowing the heavy fumes in the locale were a serious co tributino factor. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/feb/1...
She was killed by the utter negligence of those whose job is to protect you g children like her. Absolute scum.
And now the same type of creatures are using her corpse for their own political gains.
NMNeil said:
Ice_blue_tvr said:
Look at his claims of 4000 deaths due to air pollution. They aren't actual deaths nor attributed to private car emissions.
"In 2020, a landmark coroner’s report made Ella the first person in the world to have air pollution cited as a cause of death."https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/feb/1...
Graveworm said:
Those 4000 people, even if taken at face value, die from conditions that can be made worse by pollution.
4000 people haven't died. The study itself even acknowledges it would be misleading to say so.In fact, that 4000 lives (an accumulation of predicted "life years" lost) is based on future and past policies, not the ulez extension alone, as well as making assumptions that people will be living to the age of 105 on average.
Isn't that something like 0.2 of a day per londoner?!
Edited by Ice_blue_tvr on Friday 24th March 21:22
NMNeil said:
Ice_blue_tvr said:
Look at his claims of 4000 deaths due to air pollution. They aren't actual deaths nor attributed to private car emissions.
"In 2020, a landmark coroner’s report made Ella the first person in the world to have air pollution cited as a cause of death."https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/feb/1...
Poor girl died 10 years ago and thankfully none others in that time.
I’ve noticed a lot of cameras being upgraded in Harrow area last few weeks, but they might just be bus lane ones which I believe are council controlled. It’s hard for us to know what are council, what are anpr, what are or will be ulez.
To be honest, I’m absolutely sick of the number of cameras I really do feel like ‘they’ are spying on us when we’re just going about our lawful business. They’re everywhere and clearly growing. The new ones they’re putting up are domed so you can’t see where they’re looking. And NONE of them help us. Get burgled, crashed into by stolen car, get your car or motorbike nicked, or beaten up and nothing will be investigated and no cctv will be helping you even if you request it.
Re the cameras getting vandalised, it won’t stop it, and the cctv installation companies will be the only ones profiting.
To be honest, I’m absolutely sick of the number of cameras I really do feel like ‘they’ are spying on us when we’re just going about our lawful business. They’re everywhere and clearly growing. The new ones they’re putting up are domed so you can’t see where they’re looking. And NONE of them help us. Get burgled, crashed into by stolen car, get your car or motorbike nicked, or beaten up and nothing will be investigated and no cctv will be helping you even if you request it.
Re the cameras getting vandalised, it won’t stop it, and the cctv installation companies will be the only ones profiting.
CoolHands said:
I’ve noticed a lot of cameras being upgraded in Harrow area last few weeks, but they might just be bus lane ones which I believe are council controlled. It’s hard for us to know what are council, what are anpr, what are or will be ulez.
To be honest, I’m absolutely sick of the number of cameras I really do feel like ‘they’ are spying on us when we’re just going about our lawful business. They’re everywhere and clearly growing. The new ones they’re putting up are domed so you can’t see where they’re looking. And NONE of them help us. Get burgled, crashed into by stolen car, get your car or motorbike nicked, or beaten up and nothing will be investigated and no cctv will be helping you even if you request it.
Re the cameras getting vandalised, it won’t stop it, and the cctv installation companies will be the only ones profiting.
That’s not strictly true, to be fair, ANPR has been heavily involved in the resolution of some pretty serious crimes, above and beyond the usual motoring offences.To be honest, I’m absolutely sick of the number of cameras I really do feel like ‘they’ are spying on us when we’re just going about our lawful business. They’re everywhere and clearly growing. The new ones they’re putting up are domed so you can’t see where they’re looking. And NONE of them help us. Get burgled, crashed into by stolen car, get your car or motorbike nicked, or beaten up and nothing will be investigated and no cctv will be helping you even if you request it.
Re the cameras getting vandalised, it won’t stop it, and the cctv installation companies will be the only ones profiting.
Yes drug dealing and murder I’m sure. But for us all these cameras do is penalise us for minor transgressions (accidentally going into a bus lane on the wrong day). If you had to weigh up the good vs bad as a count, it would probably be 1:1000 as in drug dealing murder vs normal people penalised. Probably higher in fact.
CoolHands said:
Yes drug dealing and murder I’m sure. But for us all these cameras do is penalise us for minor transgressions (accidentally going into a bus lane on the wrong day). If you had to weigh up the good vs bad as a count, it would probably be 1:1000 as in drug dealing murder vs normal people penalised. Probably higher in fact.
Good v bad. Excellent.CoolHands said:
Is going into a bus lane by accident bad? While not impeding anything? Not in my book.
It's well proven that bus lane infractions are the gateway to full global terrorism. 
Personally, I think all the CCTV stuff was miss sold just like the ULEZ stuff is being.
It was all Installed using the sales pitch that it was about safety and stopping people murdering children etc. Its purpose and benefit from the outset was to reduce costs and increase revenues.
Where was the harm in going to the people and being honest? Would most sane people have been against the network if it had been explained that it would reduce their council tax bills via a voluntary payment system? No but it's the nature of weasels to be weasels so rather than standing in front of society, treating them with respect and being honest they opt for fear mongering and deceit.
It's what we see again with ULEZ, instead of standing up and saying that it is about road charging and tax receipts and how those receipts will be used to benefit Londoners and the bulk will be paid by non Londoners and the most affluent, instead they come out gunning for the people they despise and labelling them as right wing fasciata and child murderers.
It really is third world ghastly.
The question to ask yourself regarding all the local CCTV, given that you like many, resent its presence as you were told it was all being done to make you safer yet it is abundantly clear that these environments are less safe today than before is: Wpuld you have the same resentment towards the cctv network of it had been launched as a mechanism to lower local authority costs to yourself, increase local revenues that would benefit you and where all that money raised was voluntary as it is ultimately our choice and error to end up in a bus lane without a bus or turning right at 2am when there is absolutely no risk to turning right?
We all know these systems are about revenues so why can't we just sell them as such. London is supposed to be a global hub but it's perpetually run by people who take their state craft from either the Soviet Union or Africa. It's just embarrassing.
Orpington farmers had a bit of a protest yesterday, not that I think I will do any good.
Yes you read that right farms in Orpington. Acres and acres or open farmland with the occational tractor on it. ULEZ won't do much to the air around here its clean enough as the MP for Orpington has stated and he agrees its a cash grab.
https://ukdaily.news/london/protesters-take-to-the...
Yes you read that right farms in Orpington. Acres and acres or open farmland with the occational tractor on it. ULEZ won't do much to the air around here its clean enough as the MP for Orpington has stated and he agrees its a cash grab.
https://ukdaily.news/london/protesters-take-to-the...
Cotty said:
Orpington farmers had a bit of a protest yesterday, not that I think I will do any good.
Yes you read that right farms in Orpington. Acres and acres or open farmland with the occational tractor on it. ULEZ won't do much to the air around here its clean enough as the MP for Orpington has stated and he agrees its a cash grab.
https://ukdaily.news/london/protesters-take-to-the...
When one reads 'Orpington Farmers', is it wrong that one one initially assumes a collective of hydroponics experts with Range Rover Sports? Yes you read that right farms in Orpington. Acres and acres or open farmland with the occational tractor on it. ULEZ won't do much to the air around here its clean enough as the MP for Orpington has stated and he agrees its a cash grab.
https://ukdaily.news/london/protesters-take-to-the...
From the Spectator -->
"Consider, for instance, Khan’s assertions over Ulez, London’s Ultra Low Emission Zone.
He repeats that it was brought in to prevent premature deaths and illness, though it seems more likely that it was designed to plug the £3 billion hole in Transport for London’s finances the Mayor created by freezing fares early in his tenure.
His claim that the policies in the ‘London Environment Strategy’ (including Ulez) will reduce new incidences of disease by 300,000 and prevent 4,000 pollution-related deaths a year in the capital, has been widely disputed.
In fact, nearly all of the massive fall in NOx emissions in the last 30 years happened before 2010, and recent drops are largely attributable to Covid lockdowns.
As for the idea that Ulez was directly responsible for the reduction in polluting vehicles: this was instead result of natural retirement rather than Khan’s exorbitant levies. Of the 40 million motor vehicles currently on Britain’s roads, around 5 per cent are scrapped per year.
Londoners concerned about these levies can take little solace in his scrappage scheme, given only a third of those who asked for financial help from TfL received it. Just 15,000 cars have been scrapped under the scheme in an annual total of two million, making it more of a rounding error than revolutionary measure.
As for Skidmore, next week the government will publish its response to his net zero review. The report set out ten ‘missions,’ which were mostly shopping lists for commercial and vested interests pulled together by someone who believes that only massive government intervention can down emissions. As Ross Clark wrote in The Spectator, it could not seriously be considered ‘independent,’ given Skidmore was the very minister who pushed the net zero commitment through the House of Commons four years ago.
That the former Energy and Clean Growth Minister was able to bind the UK to this arbitrary target without even a vote underscores how preposterous this new collaboration with Khan really is. Politicians aren’t equivocating on climate action, at least not in significant numbers. They’re competing to virtue signal at the public’s expense.
This is precisely why we have a heat pump fiasco, where huge subsidies have been thrown at persuading us to make the switch and another target – of 600,000 a year – has been set. That we don’t have enough plumbers to install them, and may not generate enough electricity to power them all, are secondary issues.
And it’s why we have a government banning all petrol and diesel cars from 2030, but failing to put in place the infrastructure required to support the shift."
Source https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/sadiq-khans-gr...
"Consider, for instance, Khan’s assertions over Ulez, London’s Ultra Low Emission Zone.
He repeats that it was brought in to prevent premature deaths and illness, though it seems more likely that it was designed to plug the £3 billion hole in Transport for London’s finances the Mayor created by freezing fares early in his tenure.
His claim that the policies in the ‘London Environment Strategy’ (including Ulez) will reduce new incidences of disease by 300,000 and prevent 4,000 pollution-related deaths a year in the capital, has been widely disputed.
In fact, nearly all of the massive fall in NOx emissions in the last 30 years happened before 2010, and recent drops are largely attributable to Covid lockdowns.
As for the idea that Ulez was directly responsible for the reduction in polluting vehicles: this was instead result of natural retirement rather than Khan’s exorbitant levies. Of the 40 million motor vehicles currently on Britain’s roads, around 5 per cent are scrapped per year.
Londoners concerned about these levies can take little solace in his scrappage scheme, given only a third of those who asked for financial help from TfL received it. Just 15,000 cars have been scrapped under the scheme in an annual total of two million, making it more of a rounding error than revolutionary measure.
As for Skidmore, next week the government will publish its response to his net zero review. The report set out ten ‘missions,’ which were mostly shopping lists for commercial and vested interests pulled together by someone who believes that only massive government intervention can down emissions. As Ross Clark wrote in The Spectator, it could not seriously be considered ‘independent,’ given Skidmore was the very minister who pushed the net zero commitment through the House of Commons four years ago.
That the former Energy and Clean Growth Minister was able to bind the UK to this arbitrary target without even a vote underscores how preposterous this new collaboration with Khan really is. Politicians aren’t equivocating on climate action, at least not in significant numbers. They’re competing to virtue signal at the public’s expense.
This is precisely why we have a heat pump fiasco, where huge subsidies have been thrown at persuading us to make the switch and another target – of 600,000 a year – has been set. That we don’t have enough plumbers to install them, and may not generate enough electricity to power them all, are secondary issues.
And it’s why we have a government banning all petrol and diesel cars from 2030, but failing to put in place the infrastructure required to support the shift."
Source https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/sadiq-khans-gr...
Cotty said:
DonkeyApple said:
When one reads 'Orpington Farmers', is it wrong that one one initially assumes a collective of hydroponics experts with Range Rover Sports?
I know you are jesting but this is from a walk in Orpington
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff