Despite the endless problems that have plagued Boris’s administration so far, today he found time to deliver one of his rare concrete manifesto promises: a consultation on the Congestion Charge Western Extension.
Now, it may be good that he’s delivering a pledge, but whether it’s a worthwhile pledge is another matter entirely.
The previous Mayor also consulted before introducing the Extension, and while a majority of respondents in the proposed zone were opposed to the change, the Mayor’s opinion polling apparently showed that a majority of Londoners as a whole were not. Those in the zone complained that their voices were ignored, but in truth of course a strategic, London-wide Mayor determines strategy in one area based on the needs of London as a whole, so it wasn’t as simple as that. The point of a London-wide strategic authority is to address ‘nimbyism’ and push through things which may be unpopular in a particular area but popular overall, so it could be argued – and certainly was by Mr. Livingstone during May’s election – that that was what was happening here.
Anyway, what we’re most likely in for now is a repeat of that consultation, which doesn’t sound to me like a particularly good use of money, but then what with shovelling money into the Venezuelan state oil company, pouring cash down the drain into an unnecessary (and seemingly poorly responded-to) bus competition, lavishing dosh on Porsche, and so forth, it’s not exactly out of line with the rest of Boris’s ‘value for money’ administration.
Interestingly, in typical Boris “I don’t want to fall out with anyone” fashion, a third option – beyond the obvious “Keep the extension as it is” and “Get rid of the extension” – has appeared in the consultation: “Change the extension”. The full description of this reads:
Change the way the scheme operates by introducing account based payment, by introducing a charge free period in the middle of the day in the Western Extension, or by increasing the residents’ discount to 100%.
Account-based payment was a key, but separate, pledge of Boris’s during the election, for the Congestion Charge as a whole, so it seems disingenuous to bundle it in with this consultation, particularly when the paragraph immediately below the options reads:
With all these options, unless it is explicitly stated otherwise, the original central London Congestion Charging zone will continue to operate as it does at present.
This suggests that particular election pledge has been kicked into the long grass, even while he fulfils this other, arguably less important pledge.
It’s pretty clear, though, that some sort of ‘third way’ option is the one favoured by Boris, after he’s heard from people on both sides of the argument and been unable to reconcile their equally passionate opinions in favour of and against the Extension.
Tonight’s BBC London also showed Boris unable to maintain his impartial front as he launched the consultation with a walkabout in the zone, giving a triumphant miniature fist-pump in response to one woman plumping for the third option, which he’d presented in a pretty leading way anyway – something like “D’you want to keep it, get rid of it, or change it and make it work better and be easier to pay and cheaper and brilliant and fantastic and marvellous?” (I may have exaggerated somewhat but I’m not sure at what point I strayed from what he actually said to his underlying implication…)
Anyway, what are you waiting for? There are five weeks to respond to the consultation (it closes on 5 October), so I would strongly encourage all Londoners to do so, whatever your views. Every reply counts in this consultation and there will be a lot of focus on what the results are and what Boris does in response: the mere launching of the thing was the second-from-top story on BBC London this evening.
Tags: Congestion Charge · consultations · Western Extension23 Comments
23 responses so far ↓
I think he’s been got at by TfL - the CC needs reform, no question, and Livingstone was promising one kind of reform. Obviously the voters rejected that, fair enough, but it still needs reform.
TfL presumably know what they want, which is to keep it but update it - they don’t want abolition but neither do they want a 2003-7 era scheme preserved in aspic while the world changes. Boris has evidently been convinced that Something Bad Will Happen* if the borough Tories get their way and scrap it (his value-for-money friends at LBH&F are devoting time, space and presumably council tax payers money to geeing their residents up for outright abolition. Hence the addition of a classic British compromise option and the consultation being open to everyone. If he’d wanted a ’scrap it’ he’d have limited it to yes/no and just to the boroughs affected (those in the zone and bordering it). Hopeful signs, then - the outcome *may* be a scheme with unarguable democratic support, the Tory rentagobs will shut up and we can move on to something more useful.
* Another big hole in the finances plus increased congestion, I reckon.
The Standard span this one quite well:
“Although scrapping the scheme entirely is not a proposal, the charge could be abolished during the middle of the day, making it cheaper for businesses to operate ”
I imagine most of the pro-boris brigade are spitting feathers at that, aside from the people in K&C; it looks like they are going to get a 100% discount in both zones which appears to be the inevitable outcome of the consulation right?
Nice!
Looking at this can anybody suggest where the Standard got the bizarre information that scrapping the scheme is not an option?
It clearly is one of the options on the consultation form (although heavily discouraged in the brochure).
Because there is no chance in hell that Boris will scrap it.
Something brewing?
“Kit Malthouse, London Assembly Member for West Central – which includes Shepherd’s Bush - said: “I believe there were strong economic and environmental arguments against introducing the Western Extension and I should expect the consultation to find a majority in favour of its removal.””
Not much room for doubt there, then. Obviously Boris can ignore the consultation, but that’s a whole other can of worms.
It’ll be interesting, Tom, if Kit and Boris are at odds over what they want to see happen as a result of the consultation, as it certainly sounds like they are from your quote from Malthouse and the BBC London clip of Boris. Imagine if their differences were irreconcilable and Kit had to walk out over it…
The original London-wide consultation was highly flawed. Basically it asked only if people were in favour of reducing carbon emissions, and if they said yes it was assumed that they were in favour of the Congestion Charge extension. There was no opportunity for a reasoned rejection. In fact there would be so many exempted vehicles that the likely effect on both emissions and congestion was highly doubtful. It could well have resulted in maximum cost and inconvenience for minimum benefit. (The real benefit was to Ken’s support by the Greens as they loved 4×4 bashing. ) I would like to think that Boris’s proposals would be more sensible and in line with science. Well you never know.
[...] B.Johnson 2008), let alone easier to use is beyond me, but that’s another issue. There are indications that Johnson may be leaning increasingly towards this third option. What could have happened? Has [...]
“I would like to think that Boris’s proposals would be more sensible and in line with science. Well”
I’m sure Isabel Dedring, ex-Ken’s TfL and his new Environment brief, plus Andy Deacon, ex-Ken’s GLA team environmental bod, now appearing alongside Sir Simon Milton at LA committee meetings would be able to put him right. He could also always call on the former Mayor’s environmental adviser, Friends of the Earth director Charles Secrett, who spoke last year at a sustainability conference set up by Sir Simon Milton’s Westminster Council also attended by…Boris.
In fact, a lot of these things seem to tie back to Sir Simon Milton.
Malthouse’s problem is that he’s both a direct Boris high-level appointment and a constituency AM, which has obvious conflict-of-interest problems. He’s speaking here in his constituency role, which is why he sounds out of step with Boris and co.
it is just a government income please boris scrap it .
We have just seen big fare rises announced in London. If the western extension C-charge is abolished they will go up even further by this time next year to fill another “financial black hole”. I urge you to vote to keep the charge as I fear that most people who will take the time to vote are those who do not want the charge.
Please End the Western Extention
I personally think western extension for cc should not go ahead
Because it’s not helping traffic pollution, however government should encourage pupil to buy hybrid vehicle and their prices should be lower, so pupil can afford it.
It would be quite amusing if the consultation comes out in favour of keeping the Western Extension because only those in favour of keeping it were able to find their way from this web site to the consultation, while the rest posted their pleas to get rid of it in our comments.
“government should encourage pupil to buy hybrid vehicle and their prices should be lower”
By what mechanism do you propose to raise the finance to achieve this miracle? How do you then raise the money to solve the subsequent congestion caused by your subsidising private motoring in cities? Barmy.
I already write some comment on the congestion charge and is the most ridicule way to try to stop pollution in London: from the time we had congestion charge introduced pollution is been improved by 1%!!. Nobody liked, ruin business in the areas, anti social to be free to move around! For me is almost like a concentration camp!!!! The only way to keep it is only to keep the people working running it!! I have a car but twhen I come to the West End I use public transport and that even before the congeston charge was introduced: SCRAP IT FOR THE BENEFIT OF US ALL!!!
“is almost like a concentration camp!!!!”
Oh yes, what a good analogy. Let’s see:
Congestion charge:
People have to pay a small amount of money to drive a car in an area well served by public transport. Huge discounts apply to residents.
Concentration camp (edited for brevity):
On second thoughts, I’m not sure I can see the parallels after all. Care to highlight any?
I say get rid of congestion charge western extension
Double congestion congregated on the boarder..Westfield Shopping centre is going to turn this into a nightmare.
When the extension came about quickly central /western london became as congested as it was before the 1st congestion .
It should be scrapped
i agree with the c charge in principal. i central london there is definately an issue with the number of cars we still see on the roads daily, but i am concerned by the way the western extension has effected my business which is just inside the extended zone and very residential. since the extension came into being, i instantly saw a dramatic drop in business, my neighbour, a hair salon, closed directly due to the fact his clients wouldn’t come into the congestion zone, local shops seem to be hardest hit by the extra charges, and i should very much like to encourage the lift of the congestion charge in areas that are really uneffected by congestion. i also note that the large supermarket, sainsburys has been bypassed in a large bubble off the harrow road, allowing them to continue trading to their original customers and building up their profits. please can we have a chance to abolish the extension and resume closer to normal business please
I work in Clerkenwell and from my window can watch the traffic at the junction of Farringdon and Clerkenwell roads. Since the congestion charge started I have watched the traffic flow. I can only say there is no difference. I live in Kensington & Chelsea, only pay the weekly CC charge when necessary and use public transport at all other times. I think that to allow residents of one of the most affluent boroughs to buy a years driving anywhere within the C. Zone at a very reduced amount is a wonderful present . This means even more traffic within the city,a wonderful present to those who can easily pay the charge and the parking where ever they want. Instead of increasing the charge to discourage people from entering the original zone. It of course had affected the small business in the extension zone. My vote is to go back to original zone and increase the cost of any car except for disabled drivers.
the cc is the most silly idea of 21st century . from where did we get K.L from???????????
I wonder if these Google results explain the number of people commenting here instead of (?) at TfL’s consultation…