London to consider scrapping congestion charge for economy's sake
London Mayor Boris Johnson is considering scrapping the city's oft-maligned Congestion Charge. The pay-to-drive strategy was instituted back in 2003 as a way of reducing traffic in the busy British capital, but it has met with fierce opposition from motorists and some politicians. Shortly after taking office, Johnson got rid of the latest extension which instituted the C-Charge in western parts of the city, but the Congestion Charge Zone is still alive and well in Central London. While it may be effective in reducing traffic (though that's often debated as well), the charge of £8 to enter the CCZ, along with fines of between £60 and £180 for non-payment seems to be enough to keep shoppers out of London during the holiday season, so it has been temporarily suspended. To help boost the city's ailing economy, Johnson is extending the downtime through January 1.
When asked if he would consider ridding the city of the C-Charge completely, Johnson didn't immediately discount the idea, saying that he'd "brood on it" for a while. While it's obvious that London has a serious congestion problem, in these troubled economic times, financial problems might take priority. Stay tuned.
[Source: PistonHeads]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
ack154 7:35AM (12/19/2008)
It's too bad NY's governor doesn't see things like this.
What? Times are tough? How bout a tax for too many people being fat? That not enough? How about a tax for the internets? What? You get cable too? We'll tax that. Did you just wipe your ass the wrong way? That's doubletax.
Reply
LM 8:45AM (12/19/2008)
From a transportation planner's perspective, taking away the congestion charge is extremely short-sighted. A better way to way to attract more people into London's central district would to be reducing the fare on the Tube, and keeping the Congestion Charge in place. It's high time user fees became a permanent fixture for our actions. Congestion charges are based on the principle of charging a driver for his decision to travel during a congested time, impacting fellow drivers by contributing to congestion, while also helping to off-set the cost on lost productivity due to stalled traffic. Furthermore, health benefits arise from less congestion as air quality improves when traffic moves.
Traffic congestion in central London is not only affected by the Congestion Charge. The replacement of water pipes that are over 100 years old are helping to cause delays, which would be made inherently worse if the charge was lowered. Of course, an article on a pro-car website or press release from anti-CC'ers wouldn't dare mention that.
Reply
Matt W. 10:37AM (12/19/2008)
People like you should really live in the real world for a minute. When you have a degree, a job in the private sector and a family to raise I'll start listening to mouthy little fools like you.
LM 10:59AM (12/19/2008)
Sorry Matt W., but I'm tired of subsidizing "fools" like you, who think road space is "free". It's not and it's time to pony up.
dom 12:03PM (12/19/2008)
Thats funny because all the congestion charge funds is its own costs, its administration is so costly, bloated and inefficient it makes barley any profit despite providing motorists with nothing of value.
LM 12:08PM (12/19/2008)
It has funded improvements to transit in London.
Ivan 8:58AM (12/19/2008)
A great thing about the CC is the quality of air in Central London. I was there once before the congestion charge was introduced, and again this year, and the difference in air quality really amazed me. It's easier to breathe in London then in many European cities a fraction of its size.
Reply
Richard 9:08AM (12/19/2008)
Nooooooooooooooo!
UK and London, UNITE!
Raise Taxes!
Raise Fees!
You are our light!
You are our hope!
You are (along with the French) those whom we Americans wish to emulate (Jeremy Clarkson aside).
Please, please, continue to RAISE the fees and taxes. As high as possible.
You must show Barak Obama the way (Bawney Fwank, Chris Dodd, Nancy Pewowsi and Haiwwy Weed aweady undowstand that Amewicans down't pay enough. Yet).
Pwease hewp us cwush the repubwick-ans!
Reply
jeff 10:04AM (12/19/2008)
Congestion Charge is a good thing. It puts a monetary value on something that is scarce and in high demand: space to drive your car in central London. Considering London has an extensive and efficient public transit system, there is an incredibly viable alternative to driving, and the only downside is the relative high cost of this transit. If Boris is wants to impress his voters, I bet he would make a lot more friends by cutting transit fares in half than completely scrapping the C-charge. I lived in London all last year, and I never met a single person who drove into Central London, everybody rides the Tube! Even the old guys running my girlfriend's business rode the Tube. If you really do want to drive into the city, that's why you get a G-Wiz! Or a Tesla if you're at the other end of the market. If you're a business that needs to pick things up or drop things off in the C-zone, get a Smith Ampere (electric Ford Transit Connect) or a Smith Edison (electric Transit), it'll pay for itself very quickly.
The C-Charge has rendered electric vehicles economically viable in London, and is a real boost for new technology. And this isn't done artificially if you ask me, there's nothing artificial about the ecological and human impact of driving into a congested city, and it's about time a city has placed a monetary value on this impact. Too bad the new mayor seems to be Chump! Ken Livingston was the man and he had the balls to do what's right and make progress!
Reply
jeff 10:04AM (12/19/2008)
by the way, didn't anybody see the Top Gear race across London? Driving was WAY slower than riding a bike, riding public transit, or taking a kick ass speed boat down the Thames. If you want to get around London efficiently, you DON'T drive a car.
Reply
Richard 10:39AM (12/19/2008)
Jeff,
you are right on. And, you know, people should figure that out and start riding bikes around London. They don't need the rapacious government to screw them whilst they do.
why not the LS2LS7? 11:59AM (12/19/2008)
Quoting Top Gear skits as if they contained factual information is a great way to end up looking real stupid.
It's an entertainment show, the races are all rigged.
why not the LS2LS7? 11:58AM (12/19/2008)
Where was it in central London that shoppers weren't driving to because of the congestion charge?
Most places that exist in central London also exist outside central London. There are a few places like Harrod's or the shops on Bond/High Street that are unique. But you aren't going to find parking in Knightsbridge or Mayfair very easily, congestion charge or no.
I'm not sure the congestion charge really works to reduce traffic (congestion), it more functions as a tax. But that also means that removing it won't increase traffic, which means the retailers in central London aren't suffering terribly.
In the end, perhaps the most redeeming value of the congestion charge is it reduces the likelihood that total rubes will try to drive through central London thinking it's a good way to get from A to B. Anyone who knows what's up wouldn't try it even if it were free.
Reply
Jason 12:18PM (12/19/2008)
Are we paying attention San Francisco?!?
Reply