Olympic 'Zil' lanes are indefensible

Where's the car lane?

Today sees the start of enforcement in London of 30 miles of Olympic road lanes, banning residents and commuters from sections of city roads in favour of official Games vehicles.

The lanes - nicknamed 'Zil' lanes after the sections of Moscow roads only for vehicles carrying officials of the old Soviet Union - form part of a wider 109-mile Olympic road network, giving the fleet of Games coaches and BMWs priority by phasing traffic lights and suspending parking bays and pedestrian crossings.

Penalties of £130 will be issued to unauthorised vehicles who drive in the Games lanes when they are in operation.

In the Evening Standard recently, London Mayor Boris Johnson said that providing exclusive use of sections of London's roads for athletes, Games officials and the media is necessary so that they can "get to their events on time".

But the question has to be asked; what about the requirement placed on the rest of us to get to work on time?

We all have to plan ahead to ensure we reach work when expected, allowing for any likely transport delays. It's indefensible to argue that those involved in the Games can't do the same.

After all, who should really have priority? Participants in a sports event or people trying to keep their bosses happy, hold on to their jobs and earn a living in tough times for their families?

Given most athletes will be living in the Olympic Village next to the venues for their events, the reality is that the vast majority of users of these lanes will be ridiculously self-important International Olympic Committee grandees wishing to be treated like heads of state, technical officials on their way to measure some javelins and sports reporters who can either plan ahead or their employer can ensure other staff are available to get the coverage they need. None of whom are anywhere near important enough to warrant having huge sections of London's roads for their private use.

The commandeering of road lanes is an insult to a host city, will build local resentment and tarnish the Olympic image daily. Even in their own interest, the IOC should drop this requirement from the hosting rules for future Games.

Here in London, the Olympic 'Zil' lanes deserve to be ignored; if not by our Mayor, then by residents en masse.

Boris consults over scrapping C-charge extension

The new Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, has announced a public consultation on the future of the western extension of the congestion charging zone, which will include an option to "scrap it".

The news that the London scheme may be shrunk comes at a particularly inopportune moment for the government, as it continues to push for congestion charging to be introduced in other major British cities, like Manchester.

Criticising his predecessor's February 2007 expansion of the central London invisible toll scheme in the face of overwhelming local opposition, Boris Johnson says he has an "open mind" towards making changes and promises it will be "a genuine consultation".

The consultation will not be a 'yes/no' referendum on the extension but will include various options such as changing the hours of operation.

The plan will also include the carrying out at the same time of an attitudinal survey, factored to match the population of London as a whole.

Local residents and businesses will have a five-week opportunity to express their views on the westward extension, starting in September, with Transport for London particularly keen to hear from those within or on the borders of the extension.

Boris Johnson said: “This will be an opportunity for everyone with experience of the extension to tell me whether they want to see it removed, improved or if they are simply unmoved.”

Richmond at it again

Hot on the heels of their bizarre 'emissions-cutting' scheme that encourages people to drive their cars to work rather than leave them parked at home (an allegedly 'green' scheme that pushes people to concrete over their gardens in order to park their cars off ridiculously over-charged streets) Richmond Council in south London have come up with a new wheeze.

This time the plan to separate the borough's car users from yet more of their cash involves charges for 'drop-off' parking permits at local schools.

And once again they seem set on trying to daub this blatant tax hike as 'green'.

Top charge of £75

At the moment, parents can use a free permit provided by schools allowing them to park on double yellow lines or bays for ten minutes while they deliver or collect their children.

So far, so reasonable.

But the council have announced that, from September, a 'sliding scale' will be used to charge parents for these currently free permits, based on the CO2 emissions produced by their vehicles.

The top charge is reportedly going to be an outrageous £75 for dropping your kids off at school in anything from an average-sized family car upwards.

'Green' paint stripped

While the full details of the sliding scale have not yet been revealed (a bit of standard PR that tries to get the headlines out of the way before the gruesome details are exposed), the council's past form makes it likely that the vast majority of parents driving even the smallest cars will have to fork out extra cash where they don't have to currently.

The council's similar emissions-based scheme for residents' parking permits penalises with greatly increased charges those with cars in tax Band D and upwards.

That includes some models of small city cars like the Mini, Ford Fiesta and Nissan Micra. A very different story beyond the oft-used spin about attacking 'gas-guzzling 4x4s', and one that utterly strips away any claim that the scheme is actually about the environment rather than raising cash yet again from soft-target car users.

Sadly, going by the headlines, "4x4s" are the furthest the spin-vulnerable traditional media ever read into such plans.

Scheme condemned as 'unfair'

The council's plan has been roundly condemned by representatives of parent teacher and car user groups.

Margaret Morrissey of the National Confederation of Parent Teacher Associations has called the scheme "unfair and unrealistic", quite rightly pointing out, "Many families have three or four children, and they need the space to fit child seats that the Government insists on."

And the AA's Paul Watters said: "People carriers are very efficient at getting kids to school, considering many are seven-seaters. It might be a better idea to remove the many smaller cars."

Lib Dem warning

As a Liberal Democrat-run council, Richmond's actions give a worrying indication of what sort of faux-green financial repression car users big and small can expect if the Lib Dems achieve any governing power.

Something for us all to bear in mind with local elections looming and even a general election on the horizon.

But spare a thought for the poor car-using residents of Richmond, who clearly face endless demands on their wallets between now and their next local elections in 2010.

Unless they fight back against blatant rip off tax hikes, even when they are labelled 'green'.

London council sets controversial clamping targets

A London borough has set new targets for traffic wardens that will see more vehicles clamped and more drivers facing parking fines.

The borough of Kensington and Chelsea has set a minimum target for 2007 in its contract with National Car Parks (NCP) of 306,000 parking tickets and 15,000 vehicles clamped, according to the Guardian.

Minimum targets? How can a public authority legislate for the minimum number of people who should be punished for breaking a law? What next ... minimum targets for the number of people who should be imprisoned for murder?

Under the terms of the deal, wardens will have to issue at least 840 tickets and clamp as many as 36 vehicles each day - or face paying a fine to the council.

Lobby groups and motorists' organisations are calling for better government regulation of parking enforcement and the companies who carry it out amid concerns that targets will lead to unfair ticketing and clamping. At present, parking firms are only subject to voluntary rather than statutory guidelines.

The British Parking Association has launched an investigation into the Kensington and Chelsea contract to determine whether it breaches the organisation's guidelines.