You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
How are they monitoring all these rural roads?
With the Edinburgh LEZ they flat out said they won't have cameras on 80% of the routes into it (all the wee backstreets), though would have a ANPR camera car driving around to catch folk inside
whilst others it turns a 5-10 minute drive into one where one has to pay to pollute
, ftfy
And iirc agricultural vehicles are exempt.
I haven’t read up on the Manchester one but live on the edge of Bristol. I understand from this thread that they are different - the Manchester one seems a bit odd being over such a wide area rather than just the main bit where the pollution is most intense.
It feels like the trade vehicles are going to be needed for delivery to businesses in the zone and going about their daily jobs going to peoples houses etc. Surely they should focus firstly on trying to remove as many private commuter cars going into the middle (assuming viable other alternatives are available) and making sure that public transport is as clean as possible?
My car is petrol euro 6 so mine won’t be captured by the ulez charges in Bristol or Bath, but I do my upmost not to drive into either anyway if I can. I’ve found a route to where I sometimes bike that I think pretty much skirts round the ulez. Other than that with the commute to work I either cycle or use the new (ish) Voi electric scooters that are being piloted.
The Voi scooters work out a similar cost to the bus and much much cheaper than paying to park the car.
I would say they probably need some refinement before they get a bigger take up - they are a bit twitchy (think they could do with slightly wider handlebars) and the throttle response is terrible on them. Car drivers are also pretty bad towards cyclists and ‘scooterists’ I find. I’m pretty responsible on the road on both Voi and bike - stopping at all the lights and following the rules - yet I still get close passed and beeped at sometimes. These attitudes need to change to give more people the confidence to use these other transport types.
GM ULEZ has 850 cameras planned. I imagine the number will go up as they clamp down on rat running to avoid them. I expect Google maps will have a "avoid camera" routing option.
Surely they should focus firstly on trying to remove as many private commuter cars going into the middle
You'd think so, but that's going to affect way more voters.
And as above, there was a previous referendum - which should really be disregarded in light of the increased urgency of the climate crisis - but I suspect Burnham is picking his battles.
My car is petrol euro 6 so mine won’t be captured by the ulez charges in Bristol or Bath
you'd have to remove 3 euro 6 petrol cars for every 1 euro 5 diesel to get the same reduction in NOx. Not saying it shouldn't stretch to private vehicles (of which I'm sure plenty are still euro5), just putting some numbers to the reasoning.
but I suspect Burnham is picking his battles.
Aye he's already wound up the bus companies (rightly in my opinion) with his plan to re-regulate the buses., and make simple travel options between the buses and trams. Most folk are on his side with those plans. I can imagine that he thinks/hopes the carrot of having cheaper, simpler congestion free travel into the city city will be all that's needed.
kilo
, ftfy
Um no it targets specific people and has ZERO link to how much they pollute. (as if that is actually anything real anyway)
It's simply a punishment tax especially had on those who only need to cross 100m of Greater Manchester... I regularly drive round the M25 the long way to avoid paying the punishment tax for using the bridge.
And iirc agricultural vehicles are exempt.
What has that to do with these specific punishment being doled out by the corrupt council?
Are you suggesting a farmer should climb in a tractor to drive across the GM boundary and back out or just put their more efficient vehicle on a trailer to to avoid the punishment tax from GM?
I have just authorised an advert on ebay/autotrader for brand new Mercedes Esprinter L2H2, White on business contract hire.
Standard van, no extras, no modifications allowed. 6000mls per annum. Vehicle has 85 mile range but i found when i used one in town it got 100mls through regen etc.
12 month, £199 per month + VAT with free charger (Residential) included.
I have 12 of them and they will be gone by monday at that price. We have done them because a) they cost us shitloads of money (£50k+), b) They have quite a bit of bonus riding on them and c) We want customers to get a charger installed, get used to using ev and then in 12mths when better products come out we can put them into them. A bit like phones.
Consider
12 x £199 = £2388
you get 100% VAT and tax deduction as a business so at 20% thats £1910.40, at 40% thats £1432.80.
Hand it back in 12 months time and walk away or have another look at other EV already having your own charger ready.
I can put one of my guys details up if anyone is interested but please dont ask for different colours etc. Only change we can make is mileage and price goes up accordingly.
Um no it targets specific people and has ZERO link to how much they pollute.
But they still pollute though, much like my extra £100 on a parking permit when I had a diesel last year, didn’t use it much but I was still part of the problem
Are you suggesting a farmer should climb in a tractor to drive across the GM boundary and back out or just put their more efficient vehicle on a trailer to to avoid the punishment tax from GM?
I’m replying to your random point that a farmer can’t get the 100 yards from one bit of his farm to another with the point that agricultural vehicles, the things used by farmers, are exempt. If your mythical farmer doesn’t need a tractor maybe they could just walk your mythical 100 meters. I have no idea where the trailer bit comes from and I’ve no real desire for you to explain it either.
Didn’t realise this was council corruption though, is there a link to that?
I regularly drive round the M25 the long way to avoid paying the punishment tax for using the bridge.
Just noticed this, you’ll go the long way around the m25 to avoid a toll? The dartford crossing has been a toll since the tunnel opened in the sixties. You’re daft.
But they still pollute though, much like my extra £100 on a parking permit when I had a diesel last year, didn’t use it much but I was still part of the problem
What has that go to do with anything. Breathing pollutes What next a punishment tax for breathing ?
I’m replying to your random point that a farmer can’t get the 100 yards from one bit of his farm to another with the point that agricultural vehicles, the things used by farmers, are exempt.
Another misleading random statement..
Farmers use lots of THINGS .... many use shaving foam or matches or pens for example. i find it hard to imagine you don't realise this.
Specifically with regard to vehicles very few farmers go to Tesco in a tractor... it's terribly wasteful and polluting so they use more efficient non agricultural vehicles as well. (Again it's hard to imagine you really don't know this)
maybe they could just walk your mythical 100 meters
So after they walk the 100m with 200kg of fence posts/hay that need to be 2 miles down the NON GM road .. what do they then do? Keep another vehicle on the other side of the punishment zone outside GM?
Here's an example what specific pollution is GMC trying to avoid by forcing the farmer to drive a tractor along the road with a couple of hay bales not a pickup?
Didn’t realise this was council corruption though, is there a link to that?
Corruption and councils are inseparable. Why else are they doing this if they can't line their own pockets?
im all for clean air zones, where they are needed, but what i cant get my head around is why are necessary vehicles doing necessary journeys ( ie commercial) being penalised whereas non necessary vehicles doing non necessary journeys (ie cars) are not? Does a plumber for example make trips into the centre in his van for the fun of it? Whereas taking the car into the centre to go clothes shopping is un-penalised?
So after they walk the 100m with 200kg of fence posts/hay that need to be 2 miles down the NON GM road .. what do they then do? Keep another vehicle on the other side of the punishment zone outside GM?
200kgs of posts / hay. I’d use a tractor for that.
Wondering exactly the same teenrat.
Because Manchester had a referendum back in 2008 about introduction of a Congestion Charge /ULEZ and it got an absolute resounding no (having of course been hijacked, misrepresented etc).
So now Manchester are in a situation where they can't bring it in for private cars "because referendum".
Why else are they doing this if they can’t line their own pockets?
What shape would sir want his tin foil hat?
They have statutory duties to reduce air pollution and improve public health.
You might not be happy with the means they are using but that's a different matter
stevextc is AFAIK a troll. Do not engage.
Because Manchester had a referendum back in 2008 about introduction of a Congestion Charge /ULEZ and it got an absolute resounding no (having of course been hijacked, misrepresented etc).
So now Manchester are in a situation where they can’t bring it in for private cars “because referendum”.
why did introduction of a ULEZ go to referendum if the council has a statutory duty to reduce air pollution?
The GM zone is my excuse for getting a new van to replace my 17 year old T5. I’ve ordered a new Euro6 compliant T6.1, but with current lead times it might not arrive in time for June 23.
Daughters are looking forward to free travel passes at age 16, and the plans to have through tickets on a coordinated public transport network are excellent. Currently it is cheaper and faster to travel to central MCR by car for me, but a linked bus/rail service will change that.
why did introduction of a ULEZ go to referendum if the council has a statutory duty to reduce air pollution?
My mistake, it was just a congestion charge zone.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Manchester_congestion_charge
The coming years will be looked back upon fondly by the Automobile Manufactures Association as a glorious cash bonanza, where they could charge what they like backed by public subsidies.
The Labour party and it's politicians will be thanking the "King of the North" as they get voted out on mass at coming elections for a generation at least.
You think it's expensive to get tradesmen now. Remember Aleksander and Yurei went home. John and Fred won't be working in the areas where charging is introduced, but you will be able to get tradesmen from corporate companies with fleets of 50k vans. I'm sure it will be nice and cheap, they might even turn up if the jobs big enough and the price is right!
John and Fred won’t be working in the areas where charging is introduced,
If they live in the zone they will be paying anyway. It just means that a small figure will be added to the bill. £50 on a complete CH refit over a week is noise on the bill.
Big fleet operators like the utilities and post office will just soak it up
So lets get this straight it will have zero impact on the numbers of tradespeople (tradespeople often being one man bands) prepared to work in certain areas, is that right?
I can tell you now it will and it's more a case of the tradespeople who come in from surrounding areas opting to charge more or simply not doing the work. Many of the small firms I've worked for did a lot of work in neighbouring counties, as well as sourcing materials. In business things are simplified to reduce costs, administrative ease and maximise profit. Where any hassle's are introduced it's easier to overprice with a good butty on top or just turn down/not show up.
Big operators charge more it's as simple as that. British Gas for example typically charge double the rate of a competitive local plumber, whilst pushing financial products on their customers! They benefit from reduced costs when purchasing, whilst paying their operatives less than the market rate, hence the stakeholders trouser the money, not the workers and homeowner get's to pay over the odds for everything and are hustled into subscription services.
My estate agent emailed me to say my gas safe is now up by 20quid. Various factors including the 10 quid charge. Tbf it's been a flat fee for the last 6yrs
I know I'm dirty capitalist landlord etc etc
Is Manchester Airport in the zone?
The question is do we want to cut pollution or not?
A lot of tradespersons will likely be in compliant vehicles anyway, so that's a bit of a red herring IMO.
Was a bit miffed with the edinburgh one (and I'm sure many others), it's totally paperwork based so, in my case, my stinky UK spec car is LEZ compliant but produces more of every sort of pollution than my JDM import car which isn't, purely because it was never homologated and so doesn't have a euro rating. The Japanese ratings are tougher but that doesn't count. And the same goes for, frinstance, japanese kei cars with their tiny engines that were specifically designed for city use.
I know that in some other emissions schemes there's testing centres so that you can get cars that lack the paperwork certified, but not for us.
Are they according to who/what?
Anything Euro6 for diesel, Euro 4 for petrol. That'll be a lot of modern commercial vehicles and loads drive cars too. The FiL's massive pick up truck is exempt.
My t5.1 is a shuttle, they are classed as diesel cars and won't be charged. Shuttle is the way to go for a van if its a euro5 class
Anything Euro6 for diesel, Euro 4 for petrol. That’ll be a lot of modern commercial vehicles and loads drive cars too. The FiL’s massive pick up truck is exempt.
Yep. I don't have the exact dates to hand but it's something like 2015 for diesel and 2006 for petrol. A six year old van is a lot more affordable than a new one.
I agree traffic congestion and pollution is an issue, but this covering the whole greater Manchester area does seem a bit OTT. Let’s not kid ourselves either, vans and commercial vehicles are feeling the brunt now, but this is a gateway to everyone paying for cars and then the people that brushed it off as “businesses can just stick a quid on each job that day to cover the tenner” will be pissed off when their Mondeo is a tenner.
I’m west lancs, but to get on the M6 in our Vito I will drive about 300 yards into the area turn left or right on the M6 and pay the tenner even though the motorways aren’t being billed.
What @slowoldman said.
I will always vote against any council that initiates this kind rubbish scheme. This scheme is only meant for bureaucrats to justify their importance. They punish the small business or people who are self employed as large business can afford whatever they levied on them. CAZ … my foot.
That is a personal choice with a poorly-reasoned, ad hominem, ill-supported argument. Perhaps you have something more substantial to justify the status quo?
GMC have not gone far enough. As @crazylegs indicated, a vote curtailed the opportunity to do something radical. Now it is something. And it is necessary.
On air quality, I looked at the GMC map of roads and pollution. As expected, the less affluent areas of GM looked most affected. This has to change. As humans, all change is uncomfortable for us. Nonetheless, we need to take action to reduce urban road pollution. The GM plan makes a start on this.
Anyone remember Gordon Brown’s ‘fuel escalator’? If that had stood, we’d find that diesel and petrol would have already become unattractive and the cost of an EV would not be so daunting. I feel fairly uncomfortable endorsing such a tax as it is regressive. But it also fits the axiom of ‘polluter pays’ so while I am torn I lean towards ‘tax fossil fuels’.
I get that something needs to be done, but this type of approach always hits the poorer the most. Big companies usually have a fleet of current lease vehicles anyway, so it won’t really affect them.
My comment on This is not really related to pollution but governments don't really like one man band or small business. I think they are seen as people who should really just tow the line and work for a large company, a bit of inconvenience.
My comment on This is not really related to pollution but governments don’t really like one man band or small business. I think they are seen as people who should really just tow the line and work for a large company, a bit of inconvenience.
They might be a PITA for the civil service and local government but all politicians love the one man band company where they actually do something rather than use it as a vehicle to dodge tax hence IR35 with impacted IT contractors and not the plumber who does your boiler servicing
but this is a gateway to everyone paying for cars and then the people that brushed it off as “businesses can just stick a quid on each job that day to cover the tenner” will be pissed off when their Mondeo is a tenner.
When I worked in Manchester the car parking charges and traffic were already enough to put me off driving in. Of course there will always be people for who public transport is an inconvenience but I would venture to suggest that most city centre commuters could easily make use of public transport. My commute was a 25 min walk to the station, train to Piccadilly and 20 min walk across town. It was quicker and cheaper than driving. Agreed capacity does need improving, along with blanket provision for easy/safe cycling.
@nickjb - You post a link as a response to:
Are they according to who/what?
That doesn't answer a question not directed at you or add anything useful to the discussion that hasn't already been discussed.
BTW good for your FIL. I know a fair few gaffers who drive pickups to price jobs. They occasionally see the odd bag of cement in the back, a few bits of timber, anything that won't scratch the loadbay up too much! The lads doing the actual day-to-day work not so much.
So all tradesmen drive round in Euro 6 vans and customised VW lifestyle vehicles with alloy wheels (there's a few how shall I put this specialists that mainly cater for a certain clientele that do) just like at the Trail Centres. Right yeah course they do. We are all off to buy fleets of 50k leccy vans and will be carting tools and materials up hill and down dale in bike trailers. Maybe get a low mileage T5 off here to go with our Maserati's and Audemars Piguet watches.
TBH there are a few on here who are delusional, dismissive and as detached from reality as the ridiculous politicians who love a photo op in the papers.
So all tradesmen drive round in Euro 6 vans
No. But the point I was making is some do and plenty could. It's hardly a massive stretch to think that a tradesman could potentially own a compliant vehicle.
We are all off to buy fleets of 50k leccy vans and will be carting tools and materials up hill and down dale in bike trailers
I doubt they'll all be off to do that tomorrow but climate change is happening. We need to do something and soon. If you are unwilling to make any changes to your lifestyle or working practices then you might find you'll be getting penalised. This isn't just going away
We should get your FIL down to sort out all these tradesmen with shitty old vans. I've got a Euro 6 for getting the shopping in, so should you.
According to the north-west expert on vehicle ownership in the trades, Cha****ng, most tradesmen are already driving compliant vehicles. Then you pop up with your website link suggesting proof of such, which isn't in the link or the point you made and the obvious points you are now making.
May I suggest when you respond to a specific question on behalf of another forum member you should read the preceding comments.
Anyone got a Transporter shuttle for sale as temporary measure until the goalposts move again?
Cha****ng didn't post the link. But don't let that stop you.
Nice to see some vigour on the forum.
Well **** me what do we have here the reanimated corpse of Barry Chuckle showing off his NVQ level 2.
Dude soooo much anger and tired clichés.
I'd ask if your OK but meh
What has that go to do with anything. Breathing pollutes What next a punishment tax for breathing ?
Good god man don't give them ideas!
I can see it now, a rebranded Poll Tax. The ideologues, shills and stooges would be out in force on the internet, telling people how it's nothing, only x amount per day, easy to setup via Apple Pay and how it's only fair all adults should contribute to improve society!
Now's probably the best time to give it another whirl under the auspice of saving the environment. No one would fight it, they'd roll over and justify it.
Don’t forget mouth breathers only have to pay 50%
There’s a park and ride car park under the junction of M60 and A580 near the end of the M61 on the north side of Manchester.
@tthew I’d always wondered about that.
FWIW I don’t understand why private cars are allowed inside the inner ring road - no justification whatsoever for private cars on Deansgate. And maybe now Leese has gone…
I had a look at the government site linked here and our 2004 petrol Astra estate is surprisingly exempt on all and my 80's car only falls foul of the Birmingham charge (which suits me).
I can see a lot of tradesmen picking up cheap petrol estates and MPV's for van use.
FWIW I don’t understand why private cars are allowed inside the inner ring road – no justification whatsoever for private cars on Deansgate.
Manchester City Council make millions every year from parking fees and fines. There's every justification from a financial point of view for having cars in the city centre. This isn't unique to Manchester either, this is nationwide. Cities are trying to get rid of cars but at the same time desperate for the revenue they bring.
Manchester City Council make millions every year from parking fees and fines
True enough, though IIRC CoM outsourced a lot of their parking to NCP, and across GM paragon enforcement is… questionable.
Cameras and a specific congestion charge for anyone daft enough to drive inside the inner ring road would bring in a few quid, and I don't buy the '2008 vote argument' because frankly Lab can do whatever they like in Manchester and still control the council.
We need to get rid of nobbers in the city centre with high powered cars - nearly got run over last night as a nob in an M3 decided to try and jump a trafic queue on the wrong side of the road. Booted it in the wet and the back end slid all over. The wife is now wearing a big bruise on her arm where I dragged her and me out of the way.
Looks like there’s been a bit of work on Deansgate today: https://twitter.com/ourmanonthem62/status/1470135418670788612
I am pleased that Greater Manchester councils have just voted to refer the Clean Air Zone back to the Government
GM has tried in good faith to make the Government’s legal direction work. However, changes in the vehicle market mean it is impossible to proceed on the current basis without causing real hardship to some of our residents.
We remain committed to tackling illegal levels of air pollution in GM as soon as possible.
This decision opens up the space for urgent, joint discussions with the Government about potential changes to make the scheme fair for everyone.I am listening to people’s concerns and will always stand up for GM. I am not the final decision-maker but will do everything I can, working with Government, to get this to the right place.
I know it’s difficult but bear with us and I will keep you posted on progress.
Hmmm.
So, DEFRA have told Burnham he needs to have a charging Cat C scheme in the city centre and that a non-charging scheme is unrealistic.
Anyone have any thoughts as to what happens next?
So, DEFRA have told Burnham he needs to have a charging Cat C scheme in the city centre and that a non-charging scheme is unrealistic.
Linky to more details?
Manchester Evening News has the story
I’ve got a Euro6 VW van on order since last November, but it won’t be built till 2023 given current lead times.
Makes much more sense than the massive area they were covering, if you need to go into the inner ring road commercially youll need to factor it in or upgrade (taxis). Can't see how a non charging solution would work. Personally i think Burnham forced this outcome and wasted millions to make the point the government forced this on Machester originally. No one has come out of it well and the congestion continues to get worse due to poorly thought out routes in and out of the city designed to maximise congestion.
Personally i think Burnham forced this outcome and wasted millions to make the point the government forced this on Manchester originally.
He's a fairly shrewd political operator - unlike Khan who is taking the flak for cutting bus services and hasn't managed to loudly and constantly state that it's the Tory Government that have put TfL in that position.
Yes, it's money wasted and there was a forest of signage went up but I think he had to let it get to that point before the outcry over the fare zone became too much for the Government to ignore.
Yes, it’s money wasted and there was a forest of signage went up but I think he had to let it get to that point before the outcry over the fare zone became too much for the Government to ignore.
People had forgotten / not heard about the incoming CAZ up until the signs went up.
The perimeter was too big as proposed but I can see it happening inside the M60.
I wish someone could come up with a workable scheme for ELR to become a commuter line to reduce the burden on the A56
But nutty that it would’ve started here
So, GMCA appear to have signed off a non-charging scheme. Not sure why they’re expecting HMG to agree to this when they’ve made it clear it won’t fly…
Think the only realistic scheme is a charging zone in central Manchester/Salford. Also strongly suspect this is what Burnham wants, but he also wants HMG to mandate it to deflect the political fallout.
Massive waste of money so far.
Aye. I’d also love to know if there’s any other city that’s successfully implemented a non-charging CAZ, that has actually improved air quality.
The cynic would suggest that the people doing the latest business case for GM were locked in a room and told they couldn’t leave until they’d made the maths work.
Massive waste of money so far and no chance of a non charging zone making any difference, we've got that already, its the status quo. Manchester can cut emmssions by making the traffuc fliw and stopping people using the residential areas as rat runs. Pretty much everything implemented in the last 10 years has increased congestion and therefore pollution. The exception is some if the better cycling provision but that's not very wide spread.
Aye. I’d also love to know if there’s any other city that’s successfully implemented a non-charging CAZ, that has actually improved air quality.
Nottingham.
They were told to implement a CAZ but - because the council own and run all the bus services in house, it's not privatised like almost everywhere else - they were able to renew the bus fleet and also do a load of work with taxis (EV grants etc). Most of the council vehicles are electric as well.
That (believe it or not) brought the air quality back within limits without having to go through the time, expense, consultations etc of a charging CAZ.
Manchester can cut emmssions by making the traffuc fliw and stopping people using the residential areas as rat runs.
To go off down a rabbit hole, there’s a complete lack of political will to filter rat runs (some of which is not surprising in given e.g. rioting in Rochdale and allegedly death threats to councillors in Oldham) when it’s been suggested. I think of 10 TfGM funded traffic management schemes, only one has made it to full implementation.
The only way traffic flow is going to improve is by reducing the number of cars on the road, and if you think a CAZ is politically toxic in Manchester, a congestion charge is worse. We’re still paying for the referendum on that…
The only way traffic flow is going to improve is by reducing the number of cars on the road, and if you think a CAZ is politically toxic in Manchester, a congestion charge is worse. We’re still paying for the referendum on that…
Very much this ^^.
Every week at around this time of year (and often when there's a big match or concert as well), Manchester Evening News will have a story about how it took [family] 4hrs to even get out of the multi-story car park due to absolute gridlock outside and then calls for something to be done about it.
So a suggestion is made that perhaps [family] could think about using P/T and [family] has a complete meltdown that THEY should be the ones expected to do something!