peter marshall -

Ha ha ha ha, unlucky. Use public transport. There are loads or options round Chelsea and no need to drive your car around, locally, to do what you need.

Ken rocks! I hate 4x4s. Being from the Country, there are no use for them in the city.

John, london,

This, in effect, is admission that the 'congestion charge' has failed badly, the scheme is incredibly expensive to administer and traffic speeds in C. London have become slower since the charge was introduced. Ken, knowing he has wasted vast amounts of the public's money on this nonsense scheme, has gone back to his roots and declared a class war on cars and on the rich in a desperate bid to try and win votes of rich-hating Londoners. This disgusts me, I'm no fan of 4x4s, but to penalise so heavily is the politics of the past, this type of politics of envy has always failed. Normal cars like slightly larger engined Mondeos and Audis will also be hit by this ridiculous charge. This new tax on C. London residents and the proposed non-dom tax will have all the rich fleeing to Monaco, Dubai and Switzerland in a hurry (they don't live here for our weather), and London will be much, much, much, much poorer when they go. I believe those countries will be hoping Ken wins this summer....

S Farrell, London, UK

i think that it is a good idea, as no-one needs to drive a 4x4 through the centre of London. do they think they are in the middle of the country? they should consider buying smaller cars or perhaps taking public transport, and the increased charge will encourage them to do so.

Elisa, London, England

It's interesting that most of the respondents saying "kick Ken out" in this forum don't live in London. One even lives in New Zealand for heaven's sake. Sorry folks, he's popular here, the congestion charge is a winner and you'll have to find some other way of getting round the city when you visit. London has a public transport system that works, so buy an Oyster card and use it. Penalising the most polluting vehicles makes perfect sense. I can't go along with free entry for low emmision cars though - that will push the traffic numbers up. But I guess KL will realise that quickly enough and reinstate the standard charge for them. Don't buy one yet is my advice.

Sean Phillips, London,

I agree with most of you: it IS madness to drive INTO or THROUGH the Zone, particularly the very small and very congested "true centre" of London (the WC and EC post codes of the business district).

But those of us who already live in the Zone mostly want to drive OUT. We, in particular, have been hit with greatest unfairness in this mess. We currently pay £4 per week for the privilege of LEAVING the Zone; this will now shoot up to £125 per week! A 3000% tax increase! £6000 per year to drive the 1000 yards or so it takes to get out? Congratulations Ken, you may have finally convinced me to abandon Central London.

RC, West End, London,

Great news! I live in Hampstead and every morning I see dozens of women driving 4x4's with a 7 year old at the back just to drop the child at the local school, these women drive like they are in the Sahara desert in roads fit for a horse carriage. It's ridiculous, these cars shouldn't be allow in the roads at all. They put other drivers in danger too occupying the other lanes as Hampstead has very narrow streets

Aman, london,

Well done Ken! people driving these cars must notice this is London, an old city with neighborhoods built centuries ago where carriages and horses was the only transport available. It's hard in some streets of two lanes to drive with a mini without touching the other car, let alone a 4x4. I welcome the charge and I hope it's introduce soon in north London

anthony, london,

Emigrate........ Here there are SUVs everywhere & not an action group to be seen......

Richard, Bucharest,

Let's make everyone feel guilty about the cars they drive. And then build thousands of new homes, build new runways at our airports, carry on our global economy which means we ship and fly stuff all round the world, creating massive amounts of pollution. I wonder why no one believes anything our politicians and governments say any more. Any taxes that get raised don't get invested in anything green. Stop making individuals feel guilty for stuff which really makes no difference to the world. We need global solutions to reduce emissions across all our economies. And there isn't an easy answer to that as the world is ruled by seperate economies with governments that only care about the popular vote and the next x years they are in power!

Jon, Norwich, Norfolk

TrevorH from Oxon, FANTASTIC POINT!!! BRILLIANT!!!!

ANDREW E, hackney, london

I cant fathom what it is that people blame suv's, it luxury cars that are high emmisions vehicles. Having recently purchased a maserati i am no faced with paying an extortionate 25 pounds per day to use my car! I would say that London affords itself a an incredibly effecient and advanced public transport system I still find it imperative that we are free to drive whatever we choose.

Charles Bronson, Chelsea, London

And another thing, what has KL done with the money he has already collected from the congestion charge? This is even before the western extension. There is nothing to show for the money except expensive suits!!

tameka, clapham, london

KL needs to stop being silly, all people have to do is buy smaller car to drive into the city with. This will then lead to more pollution on the roads, because commuters will have 2 cars instead of 1 just to beat paying an extra price. KL needs to sit and think about these strategies, and the Consequences of them before putting them into place.

tameka, clapham, london

This is supposed to be a *congestion* charge, not a tax on pollution. It is a nonsense because the CO2 emissions have a global, not local effect.

Keith, Kent,

OK, So we give up our 4by4s, Can KL prove to me that the effect over the next 40 years for my kids will make any effect on thier lives?
We had a choice to buy these cars. who will pay for the devaluation of these vehicals, up to 30% over the next 4 months?
Once these Taxes commence, were will the funds go, on the Olympics?
As a manufacturer of products in India and China, maybe KL should be Looking further a field than Oxford Street!

Mark Phillips, London,

This is utterly bonkers. But then, what do you except from Ken? Those of us with long memories will recall that in the 1980s (or maybe it was the seventies) Ken was quoted as saying he "hated cars" and if he had his way he would "scrap the lot of them". Now, I have to say I do agree with some of Ken's activities but this takes the biscuit for lunacy. The problem here is that this man has a deep-rooted personal hatred of personal motor vehicles, which is clearly irrational and possibly a neurosis. London is a major city and the motor car is indispensable for many Londoners (who will almost all be users of public transport as well). Obviously the CO2 thing is a smoke screen (part of the global warming hoax - crackpot political gestures like this will make zero difference). Point is, London is stuffed full of cars and it needs them. Ken is a self-declared car hater. So, is it sensible to allow someone who avows to kill all snakes be in supreme control of the reptile house?

r harrison, east sussex, uk

So what is this? I thought a congestion charge was to reduce traffic, ok put up the charges for the big polluting cars, but hows it gonna help letting the smaller cars in for free, sooner or later the congestion problem gonna be back bigger than ever.

Dave W, Ilford,

The £8 a day saving will just about cover the repayments on a Citroen C1 - a typical band B car.

So Central London will soon get clogged up with small economical cars. And because so many will be bought, just try negotiating a discount when buying one anywhere in the country!

Another fine mess!

Rob, Wirral, UK

We pay enough tax to live in Chelsea as it is. The elimination of the resident's discount for band G vehilces is unfair and vindictive. Let Central Government control emissions by charging very large amounts of road tax or charging on a per mile basis. This is simply a tax on people with expensive cars. Why should I be charged 25 pounds for driving my mercerdes from a yellow line at 8 25am to a residents parking. It's shere nonsense. On average I drive maybe 20 miles a week in Chelsea and to be charged 6000 pounds for local driving is simply ludicrous. Come on Boris scrap the western extensions and leave Chelsea residents alone.

peter marshall, RBKC, lONDON

This, Britons, is why you can't have nice things.

Petar Bogdanov, Sofia, Bulgaria

Thanks to the MSM, so many contributors cannot grasp that a four-wheel-drive vehicle includes far more than Range Rover size off-roaders. People have swung to these large sports utility vehicles because driving a performance car in UK is a mug's game. So here's a bit reality you need to face; 4x4 is good; safer with far more stability and traction. When the going gets rough the 4x4 keeps going. When you wake up to 50cm of snow as I have frequently done in the Japan Alps, you might feel differently. The engine capacity of a 4x4 here can be as small as 650cc, so don't let the MSM do your thinking for you.

Andrew Milner, Karuizawa, Nagano

Yippee !!! My Mini Cooper Diesel does not have to pay a cent when I visit my son.

DNB West, Templecombe, UK

I lived in an outer part of London for almost 20 years until 2004. The last few years I lived in my street were an absolute nightmare due to 4x4s parked on the pavements on both sides. Owners then started converting the front gardens (which were tiny) into parking spaces;when they backed their tractors into the space they were usually overhanging the garden of the person next door. I can understand people having them where I live in Scotland as we do actually have roads here they are suitable for, but London?

Linda, Fife,

Nox fumes from diesels are killers. Since diesels have become popular in the UK the rates of asthma, a terrible disease, have soared as have other lung associated illnesses. If Ken genuinely cared about pollution and health he would be banning diesels - period!

Btw, I wanted to buy a Prius but at 6 ft 2 inches tall I could not fit beind the steering wheel and, as the car is so low, I hurt my knees and back getting in and out. This new tax on larger cars sounds like a tax on tall people as the majority of small and medium sized cars are simply too small in the cabin for tall people to fit in let alone get comfortable.

The UK makes Land/Range Rovers & Freelanders, Honda CRVs and now the Nissan Quashqai - just how many engineering jobs are going to be lost to the UK in the coming years? This tax will lose jobs and cause health problems whilst doing little to solve the problem of our cities being dirty and fume-filled!

Jan C, Swansea, UK

'Road traffic is one of the biggedst contributors to climate change' -- yeah , well I guess there is one born every minute.

96.5% of all carbon dioxide emissions are from natural sources, mankind is responsible for only 3.5%, with 0.6% coming from fuel to move vehicles, and about 1% from fuel to heat buildings. Yet vehicle fuel is taxed at 300% while fuel to heat buildings is taxed at 5% even though buildings emit nearly twice as much carbon dioxide.

oh and the biggest contributor to greenhouse gases is water vapour

Witchfinder Generals operated with more truth and logic than the anti car Green mafia and the bureaufascists..

TrevorH, Oxon,

EXCELLENT!!!
get a bicycle or move to Monte Carlo

Bruce Lee, Bicester, Oxon

I always found the congestion to be a stupid idea, Why do you have to pay to drive in your own city?

Felix Turner, London, UK

This is just ludicrous hogwash from this greedy draconian mayor, nothing but a veiled attack on the rich. The UK contributes 2% of global CO2 emissions, the 30 million cars in the whole of the UK contribute 15-20% of that 2%, which means the few thousand Band G cars in C. London, that that do very few miles a year, make up 0.000001% of global emissions. This will not make a blind bit of difference to global warming, when there are tens of thousands of new cars being bought every week in China and India, not to mention in the States. These facts make the mayor’s claim that he is fighting global warming a total joke.

Also when I've spoken to tourists that come to London, a lot of them are impressed by the fact there are fantastic Ferraris, Astons, Bentleys, etc. in C. London, (and these sort of cars already huge amounts of emission tax through fuel and road tax) and these cars show to the world we are a very successful capital city with wealth creation.

D Smith, Islington, London, UK

"Rob from Birmingham": get more informed before you write such trivial rubbish on a forum. I agree wholheartedly with Ted Coates that a the fule text is a far better reflection on the type of car you drive and the amount that you contribute to CO2 emissions.

Alexandra Daptis, London, AL

I like the idea.

If the rate at which emission intensive vehicles drive through London is reduced it might surely help the air quality and make central London a bit more enjoyable.

I wonder how many of the posters here who complain about this campaign will be complaining about the sticky air in London on the next hot summer day. Or maybe not.....they will just lock themselves in their 4x4 and turn the air con on. Prefect little world!

How many 4x4 appear to be driven by single parents o their own these days.
Why bother with such big and expensive vehicles anywhere. This is London, there is public transport almost anywhere and its quite cheap. A bus fare is only 90p anyway.....can't even buy petrol for that "much" money.

Marek, London,

I've been able to drive into the Congestion Charge zone completely free for over a year now, my vehicle being regisitered as my diabled father's second vehicle.

I've never actually done this of course. Why would I? Even my father left his exempt car at home and took the tube last time he went to central. Who on earth wants to drive in central london midweek during the day, let alone park? Its takes ages, its quicker to walk, cycle or take the tube and as its day there are hardly any drunks to avoid.

My point is who actually needs to drive a vehice into central, large or otherwise. Surely its only buisnesses and families; who don't have a choice? Therefore thats a bit harsh. But I'm sure London will still be there this time next year.

SRS, Essex,

It's laughable to read some of the comments of the Londoners. Why not walk, cycle, use a bus or use the underground to get where you're going. I live in a rural part of County Durham and I have a 4x4.

Eureka!! Maybe I wouldn't use it if someone was going to charge me 25 quid for the privilege.

At the end of the day most Londoners are only going a few hundred yards to drop kids off but maybe you should use your brains and use some of the many alternatives you have on offer. Or is that a bit too complex for you?

A Thomas, Durham,

This is just ludicrous hogwash from this greedy draconian mayor, nothing but a veiled attack on the rich. The UK contributes 2% of global CO2 emissions, the 30 million cars in the whole of the UK contribute 15-20% of that 2%, which means the few thousand Band G cars in C. London, that that do very few miles a year, make up 0.000001% of global emissions. This will not make a blind bit of difference to global warming, when there are tens of thousands of new cars being bought every week in China and India, not to mention in the States. These facts make the mayor’s claim that he is fighting global warming a total joke.

Also when I've spoken to tourists that come to London, a lot of them are impressed by the fact there are fantastic Ferraris, Astons, Bentleys, etc. in C. London, (and these sort of cars already huge amounts of emission tax through fuel and road tax) and these cars show to the world we are a very successful capital city with wealth creation.

Dan Smith, Islington, London, UK

Great idea. It's about time that people actually paid for the environmental damage that they cause. Go Ken!

simon, Lancaster,

Livingston is simply playing mind games with the public, this is not about congestion or pollution, its about politics, getting less well off people with smaller cars to vote against the better off with bigger cars, which they, sadly are bound to do.

He will then spend the extra money on his, pet, corrupt enterprises, no worry though, the people that tend to vote for him, do not work, or worry about business.

Its a bad day for both London and the small business man!

George, gillingham, kent

I agree with Ken from Liverpool
HA!

Phill, The Wirral, England

"This is another attack on personal freedom and choice which used to be the mainstay of British society."

I absolutely detest this argument. It is so misleading, disingenuous and false to be completely unworthy of even responding to but I will humour this one last time.

What about the personal freedom and choice to breathe clean and fresh air?

Do you remotely car about asthma sufferers and people with respiratory problems?

Of course not, you just want to trundle about in your car polluting everything. As long as "you're alright Jack", right? It makes me sick. We need a huge injection of social caring in this country instead of dog eat dog. We are not America and if you love pollution so much why don't you live in Chicago.

London is so lucky to have the finest local public transportation system in the world - Bus, Tram, Underground, Overground and DLR. What else do you need?

Get out of your car and save yourself a fortune running one at the same time. Clean air is good! Go Ken!

Kevin Rogers, Preston, United Kingdom

Fantastic.
Good for London.
I at present live in LA, where the Smog caused by commuters and srevices is unbearable. On top of it all as you already know it is a matter of National Pride to own the highest emission vehicIe on the road. I hope to see some similar changes here in the nearest future.

Emmanuel Todorov, LA, USA / CA

Some may moan about this, but it is fair. If you bring a gas guzzling vehicle into the city, when there is more than adequate public transport, plus cabs, then you pay for the priviledge.

Amanda, London,

The UK's entire policy on this topic is aimed simply at raising more taxes. In more civilised and technologically intelligent countries they are already rolling out things like hydrogen refuelling stations. Look at this to see how far behind this country really is.

www.h2stations.org

DickW, Aberdeen, Scotland

This is another attack on personal freedom and choice which used to be the mainstay of British society. There was no evident consultation process on this new charge. Let's get rid of Ken. He is a danger to the future of London and Londoners.

Suzanne , Maidenhead,

Great that big bulky off-roaders will be penalised - dread being hit by one (at least with a smaller car you stand a chance....)

Rob, Birmingham, UK

If you want to tax the polluter, use fuel tax. It is fairer and much simpler and cheaper to administer. Nature doesn't distinguish between 200grams of CO2 emitted in London versus the same CO2 emitted somewhere else. Also, the 225g CO2 limit doesn't simply catch 4x4 drivers; it catches a lot of large 7 person people carriers who are emitting less CO2 per person than a small car emitting little CO2 and carrying one person. And many heavy 4x4s wit diesel engines will escape the upper band in any case. So the congestion charge simply does not measure up to the claimed motives for it. If you want to reduce CO2 output, tax CO2 output via the existing fuel tax. Taxing just the rate of CO2 output as a piece of social engineering but without taking into account how many people are traveling is daft. Taxing just the rate of CO2 output without taking account of the mileage is equally daft. In short, it is a PR exercise with potentially sound motives but utterly daft logic - symbol of our times?

Tod Coates, Ambleside, England

Given that London has become a " foreign country", the rest of us can look on with some amusement at the lunacies it's now limited to inflicting on itself.

Ken Leyland, Liverpool, U.K.

Make no mistake, in about two years time when the scheme is reviewed, a charge will be placed on the low polluting cars, when everyone has switched to them. Vote lunatic ken out before it is too late

steve thomas, hornchurch,

So if you live in the 'Zone , own say, a 1998 3.0 diesel saloon (which you can't afford to replace), which is parked on the street, and only driven at the weekend, you'll be charged £6500 p.a. Enough said.

James, London, UK

This sounds like a very progressive move and I am in favour.

There are bound to be complaints , but complaints about travel in London are really annoying to the rest of us in Britain.

It seems that bus, rail, and the underground just aren't enough for some!

I wish those people would come and 'enjoy' commuting to work by public transport in Britain's other cities and, finally, realise how lucky they are.

Duncan, Leeds,

Amazing how you Brits especially Londoners for keeping this butter in the office for so long! Vote him out of the office.

It's either people can't be bothered voting, or there are more tree-huggers among us than we realise.

Daniel, Wellington, New Zealand

CO2 emissions are emphatically not Ken's problem. Sure nationally / globally CO2 is a problem, but it is dealt with nationally by VED, fuel tax etc.

BUT on a city-wide level, Ken's concern should surely be congestion, NOx, particulates etc. By encouraging city-dwellers into particulate-emitting diesels, penalising most 7-seaters and allowing a free-for-all for small cars (thus making bikes / scooters less attractive) Ken will surely only make local air quality worse.

This is not going to help congestion, may well make local pollution worse, and is not even about class war (it will hurt the drivers of Mondeos, Espaces and older cars far more than people who can afford to splash out the money for a Range Rover).

So it is purely a tax hike.

Of course, by increasing congestion and encouraging people off bikes and into cars, traffic fatalities may well decrease, which I suppose is a plus.

Simon, London,

London has now turned into the most expensive city on the planet to travel in, why does anyone bother with the place? I think it's a good move though, no-one needs a 3 litre engine to drive at 10mph.

What I do find ironic is the advert on this page for the new VW Tiguan, with the line "At home in the city". What type of 4x4 is at home in the city, they're off roaders, they should be covered in mud on a farm, not cruising down Mayfair!

And "ja, london", have you not heard of estate cars? And a vectra or Mondeo will easily fit 3 adults in the back, three children with booster seats will equally fit.

Paul, Camberley,

It's not just off roaders & 4x4's that will be hit. I drive a 2001 VW Golf which emits more than 225 grams of CO2 per kilometre (g/k). As I'm sure many of you will know, a Golf is a small car. The mayor's lunacy means that many people will now have to be forced into buying new vehicles. I wonder whether the revenue earned from this foolish venture will subsidise those who now have to embark upon an expensive financial commitment. I may as well have a 5 litre Range Rover parked outside my house! Thank you Ken, for yet another of your great ideas.

Ibi, London, UK

Sir,
I travel in and around London on a daily basis and thus have the misfortune to experience the fiasco that is now London’s Transport Policy.
The failed Congestion Tax is now being replaced with a so called Pollution based Congestion Charge. The Congestion Tax has been a failure in that traffic is now back to 2003 levels. A new wheeze was dreamt up, a tax on pollution which penalizes motorists on a different basis, and in particular mitigates against the owners of older cars and parents of large families..
Apparently more than half of the money raised in collecting the Congestion Tax is spent administering it.
Traffic lights are timed to cause maximum inconvenience and disruption to motorists.Bus lines are empty most of the time which is surely an inefficient use of road space, and cars are forced to queue in the remaining lanes, engines idling, hardly the way to reduce pollution. If Mr. Livingstone were serious about reducing pollution he would maximize the road space availa

Jeremy, London, England

Another move to help cover the spiralling costs of the system they poorly implemented... Nothing to do with being green.
Some 4x4 are much cleaner than some of the cars on the road. What about the London taxi? and it belching smoke, why have they not been forced to use better feuls?

What the greenies fail to see is 100 cars moving quicker to and from a destination is better than 1000 cars in a grid lock for 4 hours...

darren, London,

There is no doubt that this is no longer about congestion, but rather a means to make money whilst hiding behind a nice big green smoke screen.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but vehicles that are less eco-friendly are already penalised with higher road fund tax and of course higher petrol costs.

When is the publis in this country going to make a stand against people dipping their greedy little fingers into our wallets!!

Arnie, Northampton, Northants

We need a 4x4-style vehicle to carry our 3 kids (now that 2 need to have booster seats alongside the baby seat, you can't fit them all in a normal car). So Ken is penalising families. He needs kicking out.

ja, london,

Great taxing the rich even more (until they have the sense to leave (imho)), shame about the not so rich driving a 10 year old mondeo or equivalent are going to be hit the same. This will eventually force owners of older cars to buy newer models (on finance no doubt) but how is re-replacing vehicles every 2-3 years good for the enviroment?

ed, ottawa,

Great move!
thank you Ken, let us get rid of these "off roaders" good only to run fast on the speed bumps

Michele, Chelsea,

Red Ken strikes again. I am no fan of 4x4s because I can't see round them in my small car but constantly talking of a charge to get rid of 'Chelsea Tractors' is misleading as this will incorporate many other less offensive vehicles.

I pity the families and small businesses that need a certain type of vehicle to get around in and implore them to vote this tyrant out on May 1st.

Where and when was the consultation on this? I certainly wasn't consulted - not that it matters anyway as the Mayor conveniently ignored the results of the consultation on the western extension because it didn't accord with his plans.

Laura M, London,

Green with envy?

dij, Leicester,

Perhaps this will lead to some big businesses realising that they don't have to be in London, and that they can carry on business quite adequately elsewhere in the UK. This will not only reduce congestion and pollution in London, but will give others the chance to share in the money that London takes for granted. It will also help to reduce property prices in London quite markedly, so thousands will be in negative equity. Red Ken won't be bothered, he will have either been voted out or will be looking down from the most ivory of towers.

David Leslie, Perth, Scotland

In principle robbing from the rich (the high polluters) to subsidise the poor makes sense....providing that the extra revenue (really) is used to benefit eco-friendly alternatives.

It does however raise the question of whether the "congestion" charge is now a "pollution" charge, especially if the result is an increase in traffic due to an increased number of vehicles in the congestion zone (due to them being more affordable).

KJ, Winchester,

fantastic!

TH, Paris, FR