Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent
Your last chance to get tickets to Top Gear Live
Porsche is to mount a legal challenge to Ken Livingstone’s £25 daily charge for the most fuel-hungry cars despite failing to persuade any other car manufacturer to support its case.
The company has given the Mayor of London 14 days’ notice to reconsider the emissions-related charge or face an application for a judicial review.
Porsche, which fears that the charge will result in a sharp fall in sales of its sports cars and 4x4s in London and the South East, claims that the fee is disproportionate and will have a negligible impact on overall emissions. It has received legal advice that Mr Livingstone may have exceeded his powers by altering a charge that was intended to reduce congestion into one that he argues will reduce global warming.
The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders said that several of its members had begun promoting their exempt models last year.
Porsche owns part of VW, which last year launched the most fuel-efficient small diesel, the Polo Blue Motion, which produces only 99g of carbon dioxide per km. The average British car sold in 2006 produced 167g/km and the Porsche Cayenne Turbo produces 358g/km.
Under Mr Livingstone’s scheme, cars producing more than 225g/km will pay £25 a day, those emitting under 121g/km will pay nothing and all others will continue to pay £8.
Explore your passion for food with the delights of Thai, Indian & Chinese cooking
In our new series, Tony Hawks takes a dry, wry look at modern life - junk mail, interminable meetings and snooty sales assistants
Read the training tips and advice that helped our London Triathletes
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
2007
£30,000
2008
£44,990
2008
£48,489
Great car insurance deals online
c.£75,000
GlosFirstmeansbusiness
Gloucestershire
£32,795 - £41,545
Universitry of Southampton
Southampton
£
£32,795 - £41,545
Universitry of Southampton
Southampton
Competitive Package
Npower
West Midlands
Some of the finest Apts & Penthouses
Across London
Great Investment, River Views
Luxury properties within exclusive development in
Chislehurst Kent
A new experience in Luxury Living
Multi–Centre
from Only £829pp
With Ramblers Worldwide Holidays!
£POA
List your property with two leading travel websites
£POA
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Globrix Property Search - search houses for sale and rooms and property to rent in the UK. Milkround Job Search - for graduate careers in the UK. Visit our classified services and find jobs, used cars, property or holidays. Use our dating service, read our births, marriages and deaths announcements, or place your advertisement.
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
I agree with Stander - like him I live in Central London. Bill lives in N13. Perhaps in N13 you need a CCharge based on your views on pollution. In other places where you, Bill, don't live whether they be Hong Kong, Singapore (which has a far more efficient Variable Congestion Charge based on observable volumes measured by camera) or indeed us in Central London - perhaps you could let us live our lives the way we all prefer. Frankly I do agree that all those from N13 and other areas who wish to travel to central London should be taxed for the inconvenience they cause all those who actually live here. For the rest who live in Central London - perhaps we should be allowed to specifically - and separately (from those who do not live here) - vote on the topic.
Finally I also agree with Stander that there are far more efficient and useful ways of both spending our tax payers money and saving income - one of which may be to reduce the number of staff at City Hall
Martin, London, UK
Frankly amazed that one man can treat London as his own personal fiefdom and inflict his personal prejudices on the country's capital city. The fact that taxis that emit more than the limit remain exempt shows it's not about pollution and is more likely Livingston's hatred of cars. if he could actually drive then you may accept some balance in his judgement of cars.
MC, Kingston upon thames, England
To Bill: What are the external costs you refer to?? 1. Pollution - this will rise under the new £25 charge: CO2 is a natural gas produced by humans and plants (the levels of which are likely to rise thanks to the exemption for sub-120g/km cars), the £25 charge will increase the number of diesel cars in central london, diesel lest we forget is what produce far more harmful pollution and toxic gases - diesel as in the fuel used by buses, taxis and lorries. modern petrol engines on the other hand exhale better quality air then they take in. 2. CO2 emissions - Stern Report values this cost at £44 per tonne, drivers already pay 4x this by way of fuel duty, london drivers are now being asked to pay 3,500x this cost by Ken; 3. Traffic Jams??? I already sit in the traffic thanks to traffic lights designed to slow traffic down; this is a cost bourne by every road user and is our main incentive to consider alternative transport.
sorry bill, but your argument has many flaws.
Stander, London, UK
To CPA: I live in central London (you dont say if you do) and think the congestion charge is the WORST thing that has happened. £1bn of londoners cash has been wasted, I can think of 100 things we need before the CCharge; the second worst thing by the way are all the rock concerts, and parades that Ken organises every other weekend of spring and summer that turn central london into absolute gridlock on. as far as this central londoner is concerned, ken cant disappear quick enough.
Ps. regarding Porsche - they have actually won a lot of respect from drivers from standing upto the bullies at county hall, I wouldnt have considered one before but almost certainly will get one now as a thank you.
Stander, London, UK
If you live in London, particularly central London, and drive a car then you ought to be prepared to pay not just for the petrol you consume but also the 'externalised costs' of your motoring. These include air pollution, CO2 emissions and traffic jams. Why should the rest of us suffer without any compensation?
And CPA, how about voting for Siân Berry, the Green Party candidate for Mayor? You can put Ken down as number 2 and when - as alas will inevitably happen - Siân is eliminated and it comes down to Ken v Boris your vote for Ken will still count.
Bill Linton, London N13,
For many who live in central london, the introduction of the congestion charge has been has been the single greatest contribution to quality of life in recent years. Although I think some
of his political beliefs are ridiculous, Ken Livingstone has done a very good job for London. Because he is the only candidate committed to preserving these advantages, I will be forced to vote for him again.
By bringing this action Porsche seem determined to change the public view of their cars from that of elegant sports cars, to lumbering, polluting, inefficient gas guzzlers. Not a form of rebranding I would have thought to be attractive to them.
CPA, London, UK
How about Ken putting forward a proposal to improve the efficiency of the "average car" - now that would have an impact on the environment.....ah but silly me, there are too many voters with "average cars"
Environmental improvement is about absolute returns not relative. Don't tax the fringes, you have to make a difference to the majority.
At least we can all trust Ken to spend the money wisely.... ha ha!
BJB, London,
It is just another Labour stealth tax on everyone.if they French did it the public would blockade Paris.Why are we letting this happen? Do we the public have no power?Are they untouchable? It just another way taking money from who are forced to live in London or drive a car to work.
Not everyone makes City Money
DJB, Arbroath,