Author Archives: Freedom for Drivers Foundation

Silvertown and Blackwall Tunnel Charges

Posted on by
5

Transport for London (TfL) have announced the proposed charges for the Blackwall and Silvertown tunnels – the latter is expected to open in 2025.  These charges should not be a surprise as they have been planned by Sadiq Khan ever since the Silvertown Tunnel was first proposed.

Are the charges necessary? They have been justified as a way to pay for the cost of the construction of the Silvertown Tunnel. The charge for cars will be £1.50 outside peak hours but will be £4.00 between 6.00 am to 10.00 am northbound or 16.00 to 19.00 southbound. Or effectively £8.00 per day for those who commute daily though the tunnels. There will be discounts for some local residents and businesses and 100% for Blue Badge holders.

There is a public consultation on these proposals which you can respond to – see https://haveyoursay.tfl.gov.uk/tc-yourview .

I personally use the Blackwall Tunnel occasionally and reducing the queues at the Tunnel by charging is welcomed – but I have to declare a personal interest as I am a Blue Badge holder. One of my concerns is that traffic will be diverted to the Rotherhithe Tunnel which I also use but TfL only forecast a 4% increase in traffic through that tunnel.  

But it’s certainly worth reading and responding to the public consultation even though no apparent cost/benefit information is provided or the cost of running a charging scheme. The proposed charges are unlikely to stay at the proposed level for long.

This just appears to many people as yet another money grabbing scheme by Mayor Sadiq Khan. He has reportedly asked the new Government for a doubling of the £2 billion per annum that London gets from central Government to support his plans and maintain public transport in London.

Roger Lawson

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

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.

The New Transport Minister

Posted on by
5

With a change of Government we get a new Transport Minister. Her name is Louise Haigh. It appears she would like to spend more money on rail infrastructure including “nationalisation”  – what is not already effectively nationalised and under Government control.

But there may be more money to fix road potholes also.

More details in this article. https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/who-is-new-transport-secretary-louise-haigh-and-what-has-she-said-about-railways-and-roads-05-07-2024/  

Clearly there is already prejudice for rail and against road transport in the usual socialist commitment to public transport which always requires massive financial subsidies.

But at least she does not appear to be a great cycling fan and has said “that she never cycles due to Sheffield’s hills”, but has praised e-bike schemes for making cycling “more accessible”. No doubt she will be persuaded to support “active travel” by civil servants in the Department for Transport in due course when most of us just want to use the quickest, most comfortable and lowest cost transport mode which frequently means a private car.

Roger Lawson

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

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.

Congestion Charging Does Not Work – New York Abandons Plans

Posted on by
Reply

New York was planning to introduce a congestion charging system. Drivers would pay as much as $15 to enter central Manhattan. The tolls would have raised as much as $1billion for the MTA – the public transport authority – but was strongly opposed by commuters from New Jersey.

Now democrat New York Governor Kathy Hochul has reversed her previous stance and has suspended the planned implementation. She said: “now is ‘not the right time’ to inflict the sky-high tolls on New Yorkers who are already struggling to make ends meet, she said the plan will be tabled indefinitely”.

Comment: This is a sensible decision as congestion charging never works. It never achieves the stated objective of reducing traffic congestion. It didn’t in London which is still one of the world’s worst cities for traffic delays. Despite what TfL and Mayor Sadiq Khan claims, it has not been a success.  See https://www.freedomfordrivers.org/congestion . The New York Governor has made a sensible decision. Perhaps she has looked at the evidence.

More information: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12810455/Manhattan-congestion-toll-pricing-MTA-raise-money.html ; and: https://www.msn.com/en-my/news/other/hochul-reverses-manhattan-congestion-pricing-plan/ar-BB1nH3oL?

Roger Lawson

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

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.

The Future of the Motor Industry

Posted on by
1

There has been a good article published by the Brown Car Guy (SHAHZAD SHEIKH) on the current problems of car manufacturers under the title “Car Industry in Crisis”. It covers the trend to electric vehicles which has seen a major slow-down of late. The initial enthusiasm for electric vehicles is fading as the economics of them in terms of initial cost, repair costs and insurance are proving very unattractive to many buyers.

The Government surely needs to recognise that there will be major opposition to the outright ban on IC vehicles that is coming and they are already being made more expensive by Government regulation.

See article here: https://browncarguy.com/2024/06/23/car-industry-in-crisis/

Roger Lawson

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

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.

It’s Decision Time

Posted on by
3

As I have a postal vote for the General Election, it was time to decide who to vote for. I covered some points from the main party manifestos in previous blog posts. None of those manifestos excited me and I have now read the Reform Party manifesto (or “Our Contract With You” as they call it – see link below).

On Transport they say this:

CRITICAL REFORMS NEEDED IN THE FIRST 100 DAYS: Scrap HS2 Save £25 billion by scrapping the rest of this bloated vanity project. Stop the War on Drivers Legislate to ban ULEZ Clean Air Zones and Low Traffic Neighbourhoods. Scrapping Net Zero means no more bans on petrol and diesel cars and no legal requirements for manufacturers to sell electric cars. We will keep the speed limit low where safety is critical. Otherwise, 20 MPH zones will be scrapped. Accelerate Transport Infrastructure Focus on our coastal regions, Wales, the North, and the Midlands. Improve existing rail and road links. Integrated services are critical. Thereafter: Tighter Regulation and New Ownership Model for Critical National Infrastructure The British taxpayer needs to be in control of Britain’s utilities.

There is much in there that I endorse and little that I would disagree with so I have voted for the local Reform candidate. They may not win in my local constituency or win enough seats to have an impact in Parliament in the coming election but I would like to see Reform continue to develop so as to have a major impact on UK politics. They do have a number of good leaders with sensible views – I include Farage, Tice, Habib, Bull, et al.

In conclusion Reform has a better platform than the other major parties and a more practical one. So I have voted for them.

Reform Party manifesto: https://assets.nationbuilder.com/reformuk/pages/253/attachments/original/1718625371/Reform_UK_Our_Contract_with_You.pdf?1718625371

Roger Lawson

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

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.

A Quick Review of the Main Party Manifestos

Posted on by
Reply

It’s not yet time to make a final decision on who I will be voting for in the General Election but most of the party manifestos are now available. So I thought I would do a quick review.

The Conservative Manifesto is here: https://public.conservatives.com/static/documents/GE2024/Conservative-Manifesto-GE2024.pdf . At 80 pages long not many people will be reading it. Instead they will rely on sound bites in national media such as television channels and the views of their friends. That’s except those who always vote the same way as they have done historically.

The big problem with the Conservative Manifesto is that it makes promises to fix a lot of things which the Torys have had 14 years to improve but have failed abysmally to do so. Massive levels of immigration have damaged housing provision and the NHS is a shambles despite more expenditure on it. There simply aren’t enough doctors, nurses or beds to cope with a growing and more elderly population. There is no revolution in the management of the NHS which is what is really required.

Even when they mention a positive policy of “Backing drivers” they have their facts wrong. They say “While 20mph zones can help improve road safety in residential areas or outside schools, misuse undermines public trust and risks congestion and pollution”. There is no evidence they improve road safety, but there is certainly a lot of misuse of such schemes. The Tories fail to make a clear commitment on how they would stop local councils from abusing such schemes as LTNs with the object of tax raising.

There are some good policies in there, such as “introducing a legal cap on migration to guarantee that numbers will fall every year….”, but it is very unclear how they would make that stick. Likewise they say they “would end frivolous challenges that frustrate infrastructure delivery by amending the law so judicial reviews that don’t have merit do not waste court time”. Easier said than done and who is to say which have merit and which do not? Lawyers would be good at arguing on that.

There are many good things in the Tory manifesto but do we trust them to deliver? I don’t on their past track record and Rishi Sunak is more of a “consensus” politician than a forceful leader who can push through tough policies and get them implemented. In reality the Civil Service seems to be out of control and not implementing Government decisions.

The Reform Party has now become a serious challenger based on the latest YouGov opinion poll which puts them ahead of the Conservatives. You can see some of their manifesto commitments here: https://www.reformparty.uk/policies although it is apparently still a work in progress.

The key issues they identify in the NHS are: Record waiting list crisis; Staffing crisis; Ambulance and A&E crisis; Excess deaths crisis no one wants to talk about; Amongst the Worst outcomes in the developed world. Among their solutions are: NHS acquire extra operational and appointment capacity from not-for-profit providers and the private sector; tax relief on all independent healthcare and insurance – if you can pay more, let’s encourage you to do so. I would support those proposals to ease pressure on the NHS – faster better care for all they claim.

They provide some useful data on doctors, nurses and NHS beds to support their arguments and clearly want to scrap Net Zero commitments without spelling it out. In total the declared policies to cover defence, transport and many other areas are not there yet. Will we see them before the election or will Reform simply expect us to vote for change while avoiding the Labour Party and others?

The Labour Party Manifesto is here: https://labour.org.uk/change/ . They make lots of good suggestions about how they would improve the NHS without necessarily taking into account the practicalities of doing so – such as funding and staffing needs.

They say “Britain needs a new approach: mission-driven government”. Sounds good but what does it mean in practical terms?

They argue that “The National Health Service needs to move to a Neighbourhood Health Service, with more care delivered in local communities to spot problems earlier. To achieve this, we must over time shift resources to primary care and community services”. But big specialist hospitals are known to provide better services and kill fewer people. Diluting the specialist expertise will not help. This is a populist policy similar to having more neighbourhood police on the streets which is also in their manifesto, without much consideration of the practicalities and effectiveness of a new structure.

But the Labour Party certainly seem to have given more thought to what is in their manifesto so the document is more polished than the ones mentioned above.

As the policies of the major parties are so ill-defined it really comes down to who you will trust to do the right thing when they are in power!

Roger Lawson

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

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.

ULEZ Fines Not Paid

Posted on by
Reply

The Daily Express has reported based on FOI Act requests that £218 million is owed in unpaid ULEZ fines in London. That’s 950,000 fines that have not been paid since September 2023 which shows the amount of opposition to the scheme, particularly when it was expanded to outer London.

It includes one driver who has received over 200 fines for a single vehicle.

See https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1905855/unpaid-london-ulez-fines-tfl-foi

We are still awaiting any evidence that it has reduced air pollution.

Roger Lawson

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

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.

Parliamentary Petitions Lost

Posted on by
2

I have received the following email from Parliament:

You recently signed the petitions:

Give Government powers to veto or amend local road traffic schemes eg. ULEZ/LTNs

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/659730

Review the brightness of car headlights for safety

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/653793

Ban local authorities imposing 20mph speed limits on major roads

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/652269

Raise Motorway Speed Limits to 100mph and Dual Carriageways to 80mph

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/651666

Because of the General Election, the closing date for the petitions you signed has changed. All petitions now have to close at 00:01am on 30 May. This is because Parliament will be dissolved, which means all parliamentary business – including petitions – must stop. This means the petitions site will be closed and people will not be able to start or sign petitions.

We’re sorry we weren’t able to give you more notice that this would happen.

The petitions will be available for people to read on the site even though it will be closed for signatures. These petitions won’t be reopened after the election.

The Government can’t respond to petitions during the election period. This means if any of the petitions has over 10,000 signatures, they can’t receive a response from the current Government after 29 May. After the election, the new Government will have to decide whether to respond to petitions from before the election.

The current Petitions Committee, the group of MPs who decide whether petitions are debated, won’t exist after 30 May. This means that if any of the petitions has over 100,000 signatures, they can’t be scheduled for debate during this Parliament. After the election, a new Petitions Committee will be responsible for deciding which petitions are debated.

The petitions site will reopen when a new Petitions Committee is appointed, but at the moment we don’t know exactly when.

______________________

It is surely most disappointing if these petitions are to be completely lost.

Roger Lawson

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

C4 Programme, Automated Vehicles, Seat Belt Use, Classic Cars and Congestion Charge Taxes

Posted on by
Reply

There is a TV programme on Channel 4 at 8.00 pm tonight (23/5/2024) entitled “The War on Britain’s Motorists” that should be worth watching. It may cover the poor quality of Britain’s roads and no doubt fixing the potholes will be in every party’s general election manifesto. But will a few more millions of pounds to patch the odd hole really solve the problem? I think not.

Parliament has passed the Automated Vehicles Act which means vehicles with no human driver in charge could be legal by 2026. I am sceptical that this will prove of benefit other than to taxi and minicab services. In London I am not convinced that SatNav systems are good enough to know all the roads well enough to avoid mistakes. We will have to see how this works out.

Shahzad Sheikh has reported that one in four road deaths are caused by drivers or their passengers not wearing seat belts. See  https://browncarguy.com/2024/05/21/1-in-4-road-deaths-due-to-no-seatbelt/ . This is not new news to me as it was reported many years ago in my local borough of Bromley. The message is clear. However good a driver you think you are buckling up can help protect you against other idiots on the roads, or out of control driverless vehicles.

The Government has launched a Public Consultation on the registration of classic or modified vehicles. See https://www.gov.uk/government/calls-for-evidence/registering-historic-classic-rebuilt-vehicles-and-vehicles-converted-to-electric-call-for-evidence . This will be of interest to anyone who runs classic cars or modifies them.

The US Embassy is refusing to pay a claim of £14.6 million in Congestion Charge Fees, and some other embassies are also objecting. They claim it is a tax and hence are exempt. Comment: They are right. “Charges” invented by TfL are indeed taxes and they should not pay as foreign embassies are exempt from state taxes.

Roger Lawson

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

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.

Cycling Danger to Pedestrians

Posted on by
Reply
female cyclist riding bicycle along mountain road in summer
Photo by Andrea Piacquadio on Pexels.com

There have been a number of media reports on the problems caused by dangerous cycling. That includes several pedestrians killed in collisions with cyclists who were typically exceeding 20 or 30 mph speed limits. A recent example was the death of Hilda Griffiths after being hit by a cyclist in Regents Park where groups of cyclists race around the outer circle. That has a 20-mph speed limit but speed limits do not apply to cyclists as cycles are not “vehicles”. See this Telegraph article for more examples: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/05/19/justice-dangerous-cyclists-matt-briggs-legal-amendment/

Some years ago (in 2016) I pointed out the danger of cyclists using the Strava App to monitor their cycling activity. In practice they are using it to compare their pace to others and are effectively racing against the clock over known stretches of road. They wish to record the fastest time. After I wrote an article on the subject I received abuse from cyclists claiming it was untrue and asking me to remove the article. I refused.

Since then the situation has got a lot worse.

The current law does not easily enable the cyclists to be prosecuted. This may change after the passing of an amendment to the Criminal Justice Bill last week meaning cyclists who ride dangerously and kill or maim will face tougher new laws and longer prison sentences. However it will be difficult to stop the current criminality of cyclists exceeding reasonable speed limits, riding on pavements and through red lights until they have registration plates.

Roger Lawson

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

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.