Doubtless they’re the self same kiddiewinks who are ballooning due to lack of sound nutrition and physical activity. Doubtless these mums & dads are laying awake at night worrying what pollution little Jocasta or Ethan may inhale as they dash from the dull little estate car or (more likely in ECI anyway) Range Rover to the school gate.

To drive in Central London is a choice – with consequences. The upside for the driver is greater personal comfort, perhaps a little time-saving. He and his passengers forego some healthy exercise and the opportunity to engage with others at a human level (maybe thank the bus driver, help another passenger on or off a tube train or offer directions to a fellow traveller).

Consequences for us all is pollution in all its forms, depletion of scarce resources and global warming.

It seems those with children are particularly prone to schizophrenia when it comes to these choices; unwilling to accept a little inconvenience despite totally justified concerns over environment and health. If we all accept our responsibility to reduce our personal carbon footprint global benefits come to us all.

Aim for the afternoon or evening ferry, get snarled up in traffic (I can’t say I’ve noticed it become more pleasant), miss ferry, wait six hours at port for next one. OK, take morning ferry instead. Leave two and a half hours ahead at weekend, catch ferry. Leave two and a half hours ahead weekday, get snarled up in traffic that’s coming in early to skip CCG, miss ferry. OK, leave three and a half hours early, miss CCG-skippers, arrive hour and a half too early for ferry. Nnngggg…

IMO, the whole thing is shot, is Ken’s cunning stunt to avoid contemplating an integrated transport and roads policy for the whole London area, and simply adds a tax onto the wholly unpleasant experience of driving into a small part of central London.

Re the banger myth. I’m not sure that those doing it need to consciously be doing it for it to be true. Consider the economics of the motor industry, which require that customers for new cars refresh their vehicle every three to five years or so, and the treadmill aspect of the secondhand car market that induces customers to cash the car before it becomes worthless, and to aspire ever upwards.

This results in approximately serviceable vehicles being sold second, third or fourth hand for £100-£1,000, and virtually nowhere in this bracket is it cost-effective to conduct serious repairs. Result? Greater pollution from semi-serviceable vehicles, high level of dumping at the bottom end, and a situation where people with little disposable can afford £200 for a car that just about works, but where the tax, MoT (probably not possible anyway) and insurance are prohibitively expensive.

It seems to me the obvious but hard solution is to somehow break the motor industry refresh cycle. If new cars were cheaper and held value better throughout their life, then the industry would sell fewer of them, there’d be less untaxed crap on the roads, etc etc. And less people employed in the global motor industry. Hmm… tricky. (-:

The way they’re going to fix that (not) instead is by even more gantries, automated systems to snag the defaulters, more systems to identify and locate them (ID, your address on file), etc etc.

Which will likely be simply other ways to keep data on those of us who are clearly identifiable and inhabit known locations, while missing practically everybody else. The invisible number plate, BTW, I read in the Sunday Times as being achievable via a coat of cheap (has to be cheap) hairspray. I’m far too law-abiding to check to see if it works. (-:

FWIW, my personal WIBBI on congestion charge:

– it’s infuriating when you collapse back into hearth and home after a sortie into the Smoke, and forget all about paying the charge. After 10pm or midnight or whatever, you are doomed

– WIBBI you had an option to pay double the next day (kind of a morning-after pill) – still a lot better than £80, and the extra admin costs for TfL should be covered by the increased charge, and only slow down their penalty operations by one day. Of course, they may see their penalty revenue
plummet, since I suspect many non-payers would take up this offer….