Petition Against ULEZ Expansion

Gareth Bacon, Member of Parliament for Orpington, has created a petition you can sign against the expansion of the ULEZ to the rest of London.

He points out that anyone driving an older car will be charged £12.50 per day if Sadiq Khan gets his way.  He says that when household bills are rising due to inflation and global supply problems, the Mayor’s plan will hit the poorest in our community hardest. It will punish people, small businesses, and charities who cannot afford a new vehicle to raise money for Sadiq Khan’s failing administration.

He says he will do everything he can to stop Khan’s plan.

Signing the petition below will help stop the Mayor’s plan by showing the level of opposition to the expansion of ULEZ.

Sign the petition here: and stop Sadiq Khan’s new tax. And please share it with friends.

Roger Lawson


You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

13 thoughts on “Petition Against ULEZ Expansion

  1. Khan is destroying British transport heritage by his proposal. The needs of Greater London are different from central London. This proposal is a direct attack on family life in the suburbs. How does Khan expect pensioners to find ‘thousands of pounds’ to convert to electric? The conversion would be 35,000 GBP for my ‘historic vehicles’..

  2. A sledgehammer to crack a nut, or so it seems. I bought my 15 year old BMW 5 Series Diesel in good faith as it was deemed to be the less polluting option fuel wise and being an estate gave me room to transport my mobility scooter, as I’m an arthritis suffer and have limited mobility. However it is now a “Dirty Diesel” and must be banished from our roads! So as an 80 year old pensioner I’m faced with the prospect of having to sell my now, worthless car and buy something else that will be ULEZ compliant, which with the current inflation, I can ill afford. Nice one Mr Mayor!!

    • Christopher. I sympathise with your plight as I have a similar problem storing/using mobility devices using my ‘Historic Vehicles’ that formally are ‘exempt’ and absorbed much of my ‘FAS pensioner/company pension’ over the last 22 years. So as I am not protected by ‘rising inflation’ since the year 2000, I have no means to be able to convert/buy a ULEZ compliant/electric vehicle to vulnerable members of my family being the only one of it able ‘to hold/use a driving licence’ .Khan is not helpful to us pushing 90! He does not care about the consequence’s of his action and should look at the ‘failed scheme’ tried by the Mayor of Manchester!

  3. Khan agenda to ruin london to destroy a way of life for many I’m a biker n my life is bikes low in emissions easy to park how can he include bikes in this madness I’m not well off . It’s not about emissions as if ur well off u can continue to drive in low emission zones by paying so how the hell is that right …..penalise the less well off n look after the rich . Khan has no idea just an objective to destroy our enjoyment.

  4. Dear Gareth I totally agree with all you have said about the ULEZ expansion.
    I was hit by the London low emissions zone in 20/12 I replace my vehicle in 20/11 to comply with the emissions at the cost of £ 20,000 only to be now told it is now not ULEZ compliant I have not got the money to replace it so will have no choice but to pay the £ 12 – 50 daily charge having to pay this will probably mean it will not be worth me going to work depriving me of a reasonable standard of living Kahn is just ripping Londoners off to pay for TFLS debts using air pollution as an excuse to raise money the man will eventually destroy London

  5. There is no logic to his proposal. I scrapped a van in 2011, and had to take out a loan for a replacement.
    As a local tradesmen my mileage is only a few thousand miles a year, I generally drive to a job and park there all day.
    Being in Biggin Hill I am a mile from the Sevenoaks boundary. For example I would be forced to pay £12.50 to drive a mile to a ULEZ exempt borough, which is in the opposite direction to London.
    There are other towns and cities across the country which have greater vehicle density than the outer London Boroughs, but there are no charges for these.
    With more people working from home commuter traffic must be reduced together with emissions.
    Therefore this is a weak excuse to extract more revenue from the struggling public and small businesses to bail out Transport for London.
    It won’t end here because there are suggestions of Euro 7 engines by 2025. So will we be scrapping more vehicles in 3 years time? What is the carbon footprint to manufacture another batch of vehicles?

  6. Whilst I agree with clean air in central London.
    The cost benefit to the public outside the north and south circular towards the M25 is minimal and costly to the public.
    Politically it is always better to take the public with you as can be seen by the stop production of petroleum engines by 2030. Thus allowing various new technologies to improve our environment and allow costs to be spread over a longer period especially in these inflationary hit times.
    If any one has gone past a central London building site and the chocking pollution from all the engines it would make a good case for restricting them to hydrogen static and mobile engines powered by hydrogen. Hydrogen Engines are produced by JCB.

    A vast improvement to air quality and a big help to engineering as the cost is minimal and the benefit huge.

    • I agree with Gareth about those ‘static engines’. It is quite wrong for ‘the Mayor’ to put the blame and cost on ‘private/self employed driver transport’, Polluting others such as aircraft etc have no controls and get away ‘Scot free’ as the public ‘must have their holidays abroad’ a minority of the population polluting the air over London and home counties.

  7. I Live in Havering about half a mile within the proposed extended zone. I am a 73 year old pensioner who drives less then a 1000 miles a year.
    I can’t afford to buy a new ULEZ compliant car. If the Mayor got rid of the obstructions in London to allow cars to move freely there wouldn’t be the pollution

  8. If The Mayor is so concerned about air pollution why does he not oppose expansion of heathrow airport resulting in more air traffic. I would like to know how much air pollution a aircraft produces. Quite a bit I am sure

    • Aircraft pollution has been mentioned before – but no comment from anyone! What is the Mayor of London hiding from? Why is he so concerned with ‘public transport’ at the expense of the individual citizen or driver? So aircraft are a ‘holy cow’ and allowed to be ‘Scot Free! Whilst TFL rely on ‘bail outs’.

Leave a Reply