Against the odds, the polls, the general fallout from Partygate and Brexit, the Tories managed to pull off something of an electoral coup in winning last month’s Uxbridge byelection in London.
The party successfully turned the campaign for Boris Johnson’s former seat into a de facto referendum on the ultra-low emissions zone (Ulez), a green tax levied on older petrol and diesel cars spearheaded by London’s Labour mayor Sadiq Khan, proving the old adage that all politics is, on some level at least, local.
Khan’s clean air policy is to be expanded beyond central London – including to Uxbridge (one of the city’s outer boroughs) – from August 29th. Public opposition to the measure – one driver claims to have ripped down a dozen Ulez enforcement cameras – handed the Conservatives a stick with which to beat Labour, allowing them turn what seemed like a slam-dunk victory for the opposition into a narrow election win for the government (the Conservative candidate won by just 495 votes).
Buoyed by the victory, the UK government then doubled down on its anti-green agenda by controversially approving 100 new licences for oil and gas exploration in the North Sea.
How does VAT in Ireland compare with countries across Europe? A guide to a contentious tax
‘I was a cleaner in my dad’s office, which makes me a nepo baby. I got €50 a shift’
Will we have a tax liability if Dad gives us his home while he is alive?
Finding a solution for a tenant who can’t meet rent after splitting with partner
The bust-up over London’s Ulez regime is a microcosm of a global phenomenon. Attempts to address air pollution and curb transport emissions has become an increasingly divisive battleground. While restrictions on city vehicles have generally been welcomed in urban centres with good public transport systems, they’ve triggered strong public backlashes in areas with poor transport networks and where there is a heavy reliance on cars.
Uxbridge is the second-most car-dependent borough in London.
With Dublin’s main arteries already clogged with traffic, the city’s air quality deteriorating and a public that has always been heavily reliant on cars, it seems only a matter of time before the capital is swept up in these issues.
Motoring is already prohibitively expensive here, taking into account the high cost of tax, insurance and fuel, and it’s not hard to imagine how another charge – the expanded London scheme will introduce a £12.50 a day charge for drivers in the outer boroughs – could elicit a fierce reaction. Diesel drivers in London are said to be particularly aggrieved as some of the non-compliant cars and vans are less than 10 years old and were once touted as efficient.
You could imagine a system in Dublin that might impose a charge on motorists entering the city’s canal cordon at certain times or on vehicles coming off the M50 for the city centre
In a recent Irish Times article, ESRI economists Muireann Lynch and Barra Roantree argued, however, that the non-carbon component of excise duty on motor fuel – currently 30-40 cent per litre – could be replaced with a congestion charge in the “most congested cities” thereby defraying the cost on motorists while seemingly reaping the environmental benefit.
“Congestion charges are a tried-and-tested mechanism that specifically incentivise drivers to avoid cities at peak times, reducing congestion and delays,” they said. “Such a reform has the potential to leave many groups – notably hauliers, taxi drivers and rural drivers – financially better off, as they will pay less on congestion charges than they currently do on fuel duties,” they said.
You could imagine a system in Dublin that might impose a charge on motorists entering the city’s canal cordon at certain times or on vehicles coming off the M50 for the city centre.
In Singapore, vehicles contain in-vehicle units which can be detected by monitors when they pass under gantries located along the most congested routes, with motorists holding a prepaid card from which payment is deducted.
While Dublin is small compared with London, air quality is becoming a problem. Earlier this year, the Google Air Smart Dublin system detected levels of air pollution at Phibsborough junction, a notorious traffic black spot in the city, that were way above the safe limit.
Despite the opposition and the fallout from last month’s election, Khan insists his Ulez scheme in London is not merely an emissions-lowering policy but a public-health initiative that has already reduced toxic nitrogen dioxide air pollution levels in central and inner London by nearly half and a fifth respectively.
The Commission on Taxation and Welfare last year advocated the introduction of congestion charges in Dublin and other urban centres similar to those already in operation in London, Stockholm and Milan. But the Government, which never seems to move decisively on climate issues, has so far signalled a softly softly approach with Taoiseach Leo Varadkar downplaying the prospect of such charges any time soon.
Minister for Environment Eamon Ryan brought a memo to Cabinet in April setting out his intention to develop a “demand management strategy” to reduce congestion and the use of private cars but his memo also warned that “achieving a shift to transport modes with zero- or low-carbon emissions, such as active travel (walking and cycling) and public transport will require unprecedented levels of public buy-in and engagement”.
Time isn’t on the Government’s side. Despite a fall in overall emissions last year and the ongoing adoption of electric vehicles, transport emissions grew by 6 per cent.
And even if the Government isn’t minded to act on environmental or health grounds, it has a financial imperative to do so. A recent Parliamentary Budget Office report suggests the switch to electric motoring could punch a €5 billion hole in the public finances in terms of lost revenue from excise duties on fuel, motor tax, vehicle registration tax and VAT.
