Tonight:
4°c
More 'gas-guzzler' drivers to pay extra for parking permits
Katharine Barney, Evening Standard7 Jan 2009
A SCHEME to penalise "gas-guzzlers" with higher parking charges is to be rolled at across a borough.
Richmond was the first council to introduce a trial of the scheme two years ago.
Since then eight boroughs - Camden, Hackney, Haringey, Islington, Kensington and Chelsea, Lambeth, Tower Hamlets and Waltham Forest - have introduced similar schemes.
Now Richmond plans to be the first to roll out the scheme across the entire borough wherever it sets parking charges . Areas such as Royal Parks will be exempt.
The proposals would see drivers of the most polluting vehicles pay an extra 25 per cent. The majority of motorists would not be affected but some would qualify for a 25 per cent discount.
Currently the council charges residents £300 for an annual permit for cars with the biggest engines, and £450 for a second such vehicle, but charges will be reassessed in April.
Councillor David Trigg, cabinet member for traffic transport and parking on Richmond council, said: "I see the extension of CO2-related parking policy as completing something we started two years ago.
"Because of technological advances it has now become possible to apply the same principles to everyone who parks in our borough- residents and visitors alike.
"This was not possible in 2007; now that it is, I believe the system will be both fairer and more efficient.
"As part of our commitment to the environment the long term aim of this policy is to encourage people to use less-polluting cars.
"No one action will achieve this but I certainly believe local government has an important part to play and we know now that policies like this one do make most people think seriously about what they do."
Reader views (24)
Let's start taxing people for the amount of utter self-centred garbage they speak.
By that definition, Local Councillors will be taxed to the rafters - way more than the very biggest 4x4 vehicle.
- Tangomike, Kensington, London, 11/01/2009 23:07
Report abuse
Surely all these London Borough are falling foul of the Misrepresentation Act. They plainly are not charging motorists for PARKING by these measures, if they were then at best cars would be charged by the size of the vehicle, and not their engine sizes.
- Geoffrey Thumper, Yateley, Hants, 09/01/2009 16:47
Report abuse
So only 4x4 pollute? Not sport cars? Most 4x4's have shorter wheelbases than the avarage saloon. not all 4x4's have the same enjin size. They only seem larger due to their hight.
- Paul, London, 09/01/2009 12:23
Report abuse
The development of more energy efficient engines for these farmer's trucks means that, in time, they are likely to pay less and less tax and parking fees. Surely the major issues with these vehicles are not only CO2 emissions but also one of size, so tax them accordingly. After all, they use more road and create more surface wear and tear than lighter vehicles so why shouldn't they pay more?
- Simon Yates, Haywards Heath, UK, 08/01/2009 19:45
Report abuse
Where do you get the idea it's just 4x4s? I heard a threshold of 180g/km being discussed which would mean that our 1.6 megan is also caught. We had a smaller car but the baby seat wouldn't fit so we had to get a bigger one!! Try getting the pus chair on the bus!!! If David Cameron had any guts he could destroy these idiots with a raft of decent Conservative policies. As someone has said - best thing to do is shop in Kingston rather than in council car parks elsewhere.
- David In Teddington, Teddington, 08/01/2009 16:19
Report abuse
This won't bother those wealthy enough to buy cars with the new generation engines from the likes of BMW and VW which have incredible emission figures. It's now possible to drive a large high-powered car and enjoy cheap VED and cheap parking.
- C Harrison, London, 08/01/2009 15:41
Report abuse
This is just another way to extort - yes extort more money out of people. This government will continue to steal (under the guise of taxes) more and more money out of everybody regardless of whether you are on the poverty line, low, medium, high are stonkingly wealthy. Unless people start voting for a change, things will only get worse. This leadership has tried and failed to run this country. Lets do what our employers would do if we got caught stealing (uder the guise of taxes, of course). Enough verbal warnings, no written or final warnings, just the sack.
- Anon, Herts, 08/01/2009 14:40
Report abuse
Good stuff - tax these selfish drivers off the road. These cars are way too big for London's streets
- Sean, London, 08/01/2009 12:14
Report abuse
The number of gas-guzzling 4x4s in our local Waitrose car park has to be seen to be believed. Some even have roof-level exhaust pipes so that they can navigate swamps and even possibly the River Wey. And all this just to collect the weekly groceries.....I think Richmond Council has (for once) got it right.
- David, guildford, surrey, 08/01/2009 11:51
Report abuse
And the "spite taxes" sorry green taxes continue to ga ahead.
Vote them all out at the next elections, general and local.
- P I Staker, London, 08/01/2009 09:57
Report abuse
Richmond councils scheme just has to be illegal, where is the european court when you need them.
- Mr.S.Port, London, 08/01/2009 01:21
Report abuse
Oh dear - more unfair taxes based on that feeble old 'Global Warming' scam!
Even worse, it's administered by Local Government, so there's probably an entire rain-forest used up already due to the huge amount of minutes required to be taken and distributed to get it through the 27 various sub-committees involved in the bureaucratic processes needed for it to become policy.
And that's not even considering the amount of carbon that will be produced by the enormous amount of works and tax funded civil servants that it will take to implement it and enforce it...
So anyway, if they don't succeed in driving down the economy of Richmond and environs with these very misguided and disproportionate taxes, what do the council intend to do with any additional 'green' funds they generate?? - May I suggest that they consider building a wind farm on Richmond Hill, because if the obscene parking charges don't get rid of all the locals and tourists then the constant noise and appearance of the wind turbines certainly will!
- Andi-M, London, England Innit!, 07/01/2009 23:55
Report abuse
Workplace Parking Charges of £350 per annum in Nottingham and now CO2 linked parking charges, you can always depend on the Liberal Dimocrats for a bit of driver bashing. I thought pollution only occured when you drove a car and not through ownership! If they took out all the speed humps and and traffic jamming, oops, sorry calming, air quality would rise considerably, but then that would make driving a bit more pleasurable, we can't have that! Let us hope that some 'green' activists who are not flying around the world to the next 'saving the planet' conference, reads some of these comments!
- Terry Hudson, Herne Bay, Kent, 07/01/2009 23:15
Report abuse
To all the moaners - who said you had a right, as a resident, to park your car on the public highway at a discounted rate, often outside someone else's house that doesn't own a car and would prefer a clear view of the street?
Free up those spaces I say and let the market decide - residents like visitors should have to pay per hour for the privilege of parking, and at exactly the same rate. These heavily subsidised parking permits represent revenue lost to local councils. Why should we pedestrians continue to subsidise these selfish ghettoisers which are a blight on public space, if not a nuisance?
It's a shocker that people have no shame about what they are pumping into the atmosphere for their latest "necessary" two mile journey, but they should also have a care for the space they are selfishly taking up, which could be much more efficiently used by pedestrians, including children playing locally. Unless there is "no such thing as community", as well as "no such thing as climate change", according to these people.
- Reg, London, 07/01/2009 20:11
Report abuse
What a greedy bunch of Tax Guzzlers these people are! Roll on the next election!
- Charlie Chick, London, 07/01/2009 19:59
Report abuse
That clown prince of gullible warming (Al Gore) was put right via a certain court hearing that CO2 increases lag behind atmospheric warming (and not the other way round!)
One consequence of both PC idiocy and our greedy government's lust for carbon related taxes is that drivers shift from petrol cars to diesel cars and buses. Does anyone wonder why the amount of PM10 pollutants has gone up, risking the UK a hefty fine?
- Brian, London, 07/01/2009 16:35
Report abuse
Absolutely disgraceful, yet another envy/spite tax.
Gas guzzler? Tax Guzzler more like.
UK politics needs a serious refresh.
- Tim, London, 07/01/2009 16:31
Report abuse
Cor,it's a right money spinner this green lark.Funny how the cash strapped Labour boroughs have been quick to take this on board.Let's not worry about crime if we can save the doomed polar bear.
- Steve, London, 07/01/2009 14:26
Report abuse
Councillor David Trigg was elected to represent the best interests of the residents in the Borough. His actions clearly demonstrate his desire to destroy what is left of the dying retail trades in the Twickenham and Richmond. If the man had any moral decency he would resign his position, however we know this will not happen.
- Ian Makin, Twickenham, 07/01/2009 13:44
Report abuse
Councillors are elected to make sure that people are well represented at a local level - bins emptied, streets kept clean, local services effectively run. They are not elected to impose thier political dogma on people. It is none of Cllr Trigg's business what car I choose to legally drive, and he certainly has no right to seek to change my behaviour or fine me for making a legal choice. The UK is responsible for about two per cent of the world's harmful emissions. Private transport accounts for about two per cent of this two per cent. China alone INCREASES its harmful emissions by a factor greater than the entire UK output every three months. People are losing their jobs, their homes and hope. Whoever chose to vote for this person I hope will realise that they should ensure they don't make the same mistake again next time around.
- Malcolm Cupis, Bristol, England, 07/01/2009 13:02
Report abuse
During my 55 years in Twickenham the town centre went down and down, and the closure of Woolworths must have punched a hole in its centre. So what's LBRuT's answer? Persuade those driving higher-CO2 cars to go somewhere else, with negative effects on the environment and on an already sadly lacking town centre. And, of course, even those who wouldn't have to pay more will be left wondering if they might and so go to Hounslow or Kingston instead. If there's a Japanese town called Kamikaze, perhaps Twickenham could be twinned with it!
Just to be fair though, Twickenham town centre is a great place to go if you're after charity shops, fresh fish or power tools. But not much else.
Perhaps it would be best to go back to the old days when business rates were paid to local councils - then those who played fast and loose with their town centres would be hit financially.
- Tonyb, Melbourne, Australia, 07/01/2009 12:20
Report abuse
If my car is parked, it generates no carbons. It doesn't matter if it is a Land Rover or a Toyota Pious. Bonkers...
- Nobby Clark, Perth, Scotland, 07/01/2009 12:08
Report abuse
Oh how very sanctimonious: the fact that gas-guzzlers are usually family cars and work out to be less polluting PER PERSON if they travel with 2 or more people than something like a Smart Car, is conveniently over-looked.
Blatent wealth tax on people who are percieved to be wealthier - regardless of whether they are or not.
- Roz, Chamonix, France, 07/01/2009 11:37
Report abuse
Remember those days when mother nature ran the planet ? OK she was a bit of a tyrant - turning Sussex by the Sea into tropical swamp and chucking in the odd ice age. Now scientists rule we are all doomed. They have only been at the helm a few short years and blow me the game is over! Unless we provide a few more research grants and pay a wee bit more tax it will be sooner rather than later.
- Wills, Soton, 07/01/2009 10:27
Report abuse
