- Joined
- 22 Jan 2007
- Messages
- 17,616
- Reaction score
- 2,422
- Country
Mugs seem happy to pay fines when they could avoid them. Why not take the easy money...Great, so now they're an investment! Loads more on the way then.
Mugs seem happy to pay fines when they could avoid them. Why not take the easy money...Great, so now they're an investment! Loads more on the way then.
Mugs seem happy to pay fines when they could avoid them. Why not take the easy money...
other polls disagree.Latest Polling Shows Overwhelming Public Support For LTNs
In London, a new poll found that 58% of respondents supported the introduction of LTNs, while only 17% were opposed to blocking residential streets to rat-running moto...www.forbes.com
Pro-LTN councillors do not suffer at ballot box, research suggests
Voicing support for traffic schemes has no statistically significant effect on re-election chances, study findswww.theguardian.com
Not everyone thinks it is a daft idea.
you don't have to pay a fine if someone has thrown paint over the signage.Mugs seem happy to pay fines when they could avoid them. Why not take the easy money...
Yes. Not all people think it is a daft idea, that is an opinion.other polls disagree.
There you go then, sorted.you don't have to pay a fine if someone has thrown paint over the signage.
If it is for good reasons, I don't mind.people drive too much, but we don't want the government to force us to change.
I wouldn't like that either. But there is no comparison, so again I don't mind.people like the sound of the things we are promised, but not the look of the Northern Ireland troubles style road blocks.
You think 2030 is too little time to adapt to the Green economy, demanded by Climate Change?I fully understand that, for those who suffer health conditions due to exhaust fumes, these changes will be welcome.
However, as usual with our governments, there is a distinct lack of a well thought out, robust strategy around all this environmental stuff that gives the high majority of people a more realistic timeframe to adapt.
The UK has “systematically and persistently” broken legal limits on toxic air pollution for a decade, the court of justice of the EU (CJEU) has ruled.
Levels of nitrogen dioxide, mostly from diesel vehicles, remain illegally high in 75% of urban areas and on Thursday the court said the UK had failed to tackle the problem in the shortest possible time, as required by law.
The UK faces fines for breaching EU law on water treatment after plants in northern England and in London dumped raw sewage into waterways.
That is the outcome of a ruling by the European Court of Justice, which has yet to decide what the penalty will be.
Under an EU directive introduced in 1991, Britain was obliged to meet new standards for treating waste water.
Government relaxes rules on waterway pollution in bid to boost home building
The government will instead offset the pollution from new developments in a scheme funded by the taxpayer, but the changes have angered environmentalists.
Brexit again.You mean a democratically elected Tory government wants a review of a democratically elected Labout Mayor over a policy of protecting the health of Londoners?
Well I'll be blowed!
It's a Mayoral policy that tries to go some way of addressing the shortfall of the air quality requirements of the EU.
A criteria conveniently avoided by Brexit.
So a Brexit benefit - more toxicity in the air, more deaths due to pollution, more disabilities, etc
A typical short-term policy desparately chasing votes.
Of course.And of course when the number of vehicles that are ULEZ compliant rises past a certain level then the technology will change to a pay per mile system whatever the vehicle type is!
Why not?Brexit again.