Autocar - First for car news and reviews

Porsche is turning up the heat in its battle with London mayor Ken Livingstone's proposed £25-a-day congestion charge, releasing polling data that shows a majority of Londoners think the increased charge is too high - and demanding that Livingstone releases the poll that he conducted on the same topic.
The proposed increase in the charge from £8 to £25 for cars that emit over 225 g/km will affect almost every model in Porsche's current line-up, and the company has gone on the offensive in rec...Read the full article

Cant blame Porsche for having a go at that self opionated believes his own hype tree hugger Livingstone. He just wants everyone to go back to the dark ages and use Bikes to get around intead off any cars etc. As if fuel isnt expensive enough he wants to charge £25 to get in and around London on a daily basis for anyone who doesnt drive a Ford Ka or its ilke.

Thankgod he isnt up here in Yorkshire.

London, you voted him in, you can keep him..

I think Porsche has finally mentioned what everyone else has been thinking - the proposed rise in C-Charge is simply a means to grab more money from the motorist with no, or so it seems, benefits for those whom pay it. What's the betting that the survey document mentioned vanishes from their website as if by magic one day? What about the Taxi's who travel around London all day and their rather high pollution? How can a Taxi, with one driver and one passenger be better for the environment than one Porsche with two people? Look at the CO2 emissions and the figuers are obvious. Come on - one rule for all and not a unfair playing field. There has to be another way to solve the problem of congestion in, and around, London without daft charing schemes... 

What has a 'Congestion' charge got to do with co2?

Giving cars reductions or allowing them to travel free doesn't help to reduce congestion.  All cars whether electric, hybrids or V12 petrol engined cause the same congestion and so all cars should pay £8 without exception.  Giving residents within the zone a reduction is ridiculous as they are better placed to use public transport (tube, trains and buses).

If they want to then add a charge for cars which give out a high number of co2 particulates then do so on top.  They must have to prove their case in detail though and be backed by people who are specialists in this field.

 "CO2 Particulates"?

 Do you mean 'CO2 and particulates'? One is a colourless, odourless gas produced by all living things, the other is the black smoke diesel taxis and buses produce.
 

NiallOswald:

"CO2 Particulates"?

Do you mean 'CO2 and particulates'? One is a colourless, odourless gas produced by all living things, the other is the black smoke diesel taxis and buses produce.

 

LOL Sorry i mean't co2 gases!  I was on the phone at the time and so miles away. 

Also living in North Yorks and only travelling to London by train (apart from a trip to retrieve my daughters belongings last month) I was just wondering something about these charges. If your car is parked in the congestion zone and you dont drive it do you still have to pay?

 

I also agree with my Yorkshire friend, you voted for him and thankfully you can keep him. And I will go further and say I am pleased I rarely have to go there.

Man is made from Carbon and that comes directly from the carbon in plants we eat which uses CO2 as a 'fertiliser' for their own growth. And the rise in mans CO2 emissions (I've just seen research from the body that organised a petition of 18,000 scientists who dispute climate change thesis) has boosted plant growth in plants like pine trees and a host of other green stuff. The scientist claimed mans CO2 emissions are actually having a hugely benficial impact on plant growth - American forests have increased 50% since recent industrial growth.

Porsche are quite right to 'counter' their survey results against Red Kens claims. The politicians are desperately dodgy operators on facts and figures (WMD, Passive-Smoking, Speed Limits, CO2 and climate change etc etc etc). And a Ken/TFL spokesman recently fired off "people don't want these polluting cars on their streets". Is that their opinion or have they a basis for this represntation? Stick it to 'em Porsche.

As Mr Spock frequently pointed out.

davidh88220:

I think Porsche has finally mentioned what everyone else has been thinking - the proposed rise in C-Charge is simply a means to grab more money from the motorist with no, or so it seems, benefits for those whom pay it.

 

Just more money grabbing ideas from our old communist Ken and his Con Charge!

A stealth tax, not a 'Green tax', and don't motorists pay for emmissions anyway with fuel duty. Out with Communists!

I think 80p fuel duty should be enough!

I'd like to see what Ken drives!

Jaggie:

A stealth tax, not a 'Green tax', and don't motorists pay for emmissions anyway with fuel duty. Out with Communists!

Tax maybe, but not a stealth tax. This charge has had more newspaper reports, TV spots and internet discussion than you can shake a stick at. Plus unlike most taxes that you pay automatically (VAT, PAYE, Insurance premium tax), this one you actually have to call up and pay by credit card. It's about as stealthy as a herd of elephants.

Got to agree with Porsche though, £25 is just too far. CO2 isn't even a local pollutant. You can argue until you are blue in the face about climate change, but not even Red Ken can say that it causes immediate problems in the location it is emmited. That honour goes to the heavy particualtes and harmful NOx that often aren't related to CO2.

phenergn:

Tax maybe, but not a stealth tax.

 It is a stealth tax because it's hidden behind a green agenda and called a 'green tax' when its really designed to fill Ken's coffers!

He's like Tony Bliar with his lies!