Boris left us 1.5 in the red. Khan got us to 0.5 billion in the red .
Also Bors agreed to get rid of the 500 mil grant per year so with that grant tfl would be no debt and in profit (not that it runs for profit all invested back in) by time Covid hit
Good idea imo, to be honest it's the bare minimum he could have done. The other option was a daily charge on all non electric cars
It's just a stop gap until road pricing comes in later this decade, first in London then the whole country not long after.
I looked at my first ever car, a 02 plate that I bought for £800 in 2012 meets ULEZ which does make me think how many people moaning even have a ineligible car
YGNB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 1:40 pm
Good idea imo, to be honest it's the bare minimum he could have done. The other option was a daily charge on all non electric cars
It's just a stop gap until road pricing comes in later this decade, first in London then the whole country not long after.
I looked at my first ever car, a 02 plate that I bought for £800 in 2012 meets ULEZ which does make me think how many people moaning even have a ineligible car
Same position as me. Agree with it. I think there is a lot of misinformation out there and assumption
2005 for petrol cars is 18 years
2016 7 years for diesel
Now diesel is the issue but I bet a lot are fine and have just assumed there not
Take DL niece earlier (not a dig) Im guessing the locals have been told ulez will affect them but looking into it her route to work is completely free of ulez
How many local Facebook groups are putting out misinformation to drum up support for anti ulez
It improves air quality
I have 3 kids
5 year old has asthma already
The twins not yet but likely
I want air quality improved for them
However I do see it as the thin edge of the wedge . Once in the goal posts will change
mumbles87 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 1:47 pm
Same position as me. Agree with it. I think there is a lot of misinformation out there and assumption
2005 for petrol cars is 18 years
2016 7 years for diesel
Now diesel is the issue but I bet a lot are fine and have just assumed there not
Take DL niece earlier (not a dig) Im guessing the locals have been told ulez will affect them but looking into it her route to work is completely free of ulez
How many local Facebook groups are putting out misinformation to drum up support for anti ulez
It improves air quality
I have 3 kids
5 year old has asthma already
The twins not yet but likely
I want air quality improved for them
However I do see it as the thin edge of the wedge . Once in the goal posts will change
The goal posts will change but I don't think that's any secret at all. In 2017 the Mayor said the plan was for a zero emission zone for central London in 2025, inner London in 2040 and outer London in 2050.
Both central and local government have made it clear road user pricing is the future. Hackney council are looking to bring it in in the next couple of years. Even the Trussite Tories favourite country Singapore has it.
Boris left us 1.5 in the red. Khan got us to 0.5 billion in the red .
Also Bors agreed to get rid of the 500 mil grant per year so with that grant tfl would be no debt and in profit (not that it runs for profit all invested back in) by time Covid hit
Doesn't show anything at all really only cost in interest
Boris left the debt and khan reduced it. I will try and dig out the articles
However the fact remains the kpmg report ordered by the Tories into tfl finances was suppressed because it found tfl well run and not mismanaging funds.
It demonstrates that TfL's previously budgeted operating deficit of £968m in 2018/19 has been significantly reduced and is now forecast to be almost halved to £500m by the end of 2018/19 as a result of tight financial management.
Going into covid we were set to be operational costs of no deficit by 2023
mumbles87 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 2:20 pm
Doesn't show anything at all really only cost in interest
Boris left the debt and khan reduced it. I will try and dig out the articles
However the fact remains the kpmg report ordered by the Tories into tfl finances was suppressed because it found tfl well run and not mismanaging funds.
Did you not scroll down the page where is showed that borrowing has increased year on year to 2020 (doesn't go past that).
3times wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 4:06 pm
Did you not scroll down the page where is showed that borrowing has increased year on year to 2020 (doesn't go past that).
Borrowing can increase but it's operational deficits that is key.
They had to borrow more as they took more control of crossrail as mentioned in the article you posted.
Reducing operational deficit whilst having a fare freeze and no gov grant points to good money management
If Khan is serious about easing congestion and reducing emissions, then why not make the charge £100 or maybe even £200? The anyone that doesn't pay the daily charge should be fined £500.
This is yet another tax with the sole purpose of generating more dough for the City Halls coffers.
westham,eggyandchips wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 7:14 pm
If Khan is serious about easing congestion and reducing emissions, then why not make the charge £100 or maybe even £200? The anyone that doesn't pay the daily charge should be fined £500.
This is yet another tax with the sole purpose of generating more dough for the City Halls coffers.
Khan is a shithouse of epic proportions.
Scotland are doing £50 fines for going in.
Its a step down from the £2 a day charge to enter greater London if you were from outside London
He has a massive point. Tfl pay 600 million per year out of its budget to maintain the roads. It gets a grant of £300 million from the DFT for it .. that's 300 million it has to find
Yet every car registration in London the VED is sent to central gov and he can't keep a penny to help fund the road maintenance
^^^^I was more wondering what he would view as a success, raising loads of money because lots of 'polluting' vehicles are still driving in London, or raising very little because the polluting vehicles are staying outside the zone?
Does he really want to keep all those vehicles outside, or does he just want them to carry on as before and pocket their fees?
Johnny Byrne's Boots wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 8:13 pm
^^^^I was more wondering what he would view as a success, raising loads of money because lots of 'polluting' vehicles are still driving in London, or raising very little because the polluting vehicles are staying outside the zone?
Does he really want to keep all those vehicles outside, or does he just want them to carry on as before and pocket their fees?
Its a win win
If they carry on £££
If they stay away air quality improves and he is the mayor who has got a step towards net zero
I believe the scheme thus far has been loss making as more people switched to newer cars etc than they anticipated. It is was purely to make money it's a terrible way to do it
It is funny though. Many people in the other tfl thread have said 'tfl need to get their finances in order, central government shouldn't give them any money' and ermmm now complain about a 'money making scheme '
YGNB wrote: ↑Thu Feb 02, 2023 9:26 pm
I believe the scheme thus far has been loss making as more people switched to newer cars etc than they anticipated. It is was purely to make money it's a terrible way to do it
It is funny though. Many people in the other tfl thread have said 'tfl need to get their finances in order, central government shouldn't give them any money' and ermmm now complain about a 'money making scheme '
It's fine as long as it doesn't affect them I find
Bottom line is there are too many cars on the roads. And electric or new energy efficient cars are not the answer. Fewer cars is the answer. Society as a whole can't afford for everyone to drive around in their individual little tin cans so it'll have to find an alternative.
If you are willing to spend £400,000 on legal fees to fight something that will improve air quality and not affect that many of your borough you got to ask yourself is that the best use a public money? Surely you could use that to assist members of your borough affected change cars?
