VW Vortex - Volkswagen Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

· Registered
Bluestar, XL40
Joined
·
16,241 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
http://www.edmunds.com/insidel...25226
Quote »

The German automaker has announced its intentions to file for a judicial review seeking to have the proposal quashed by a British judge. Porsche says the pollution charge is unfairly high, doesn't significantly help the environment and discourages business in London. The company claims that over one year, the reduction in carbon-dioxide emissions with the pollution charge is equivalent to just four hours of emissions from planes passing through Heathrow Airport.
Under Mayor Ken Livingstone's proposed changes, vehicles with high carbon-dioxide emissions would have to pay £25, or the equivalent of about $50, to enter the London's congestion zone. Currently, motorists pay £8 (about $15) to enter the congestion zone, regardless of how much their vehicle pollutes. All Porsche vehicles, except some models of the Boxster and Cayman, would qualify as high-pollution vehicles if the new rules go into effect this October.
In addition to fighting the emissions charge, the company is also fighting for the public's favor, launching a Web site that explains its case against the new congestion charges and allows supporters to sign a petition.

http://www.porschejudicialreview.co.uk/

 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,694 Posts
Re: Porsche files judicial review over London congestion charge (Sledge)

Quote »
The company claims that over one year, the reduction in carbon-dioxide emissions with the pollution charge is equivalent to just four hours of emissions from planes passing through Heathrow Airport.

As do Transport For Londons OWN FIGURES. Less than 0.05%.
I have signed the petition.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
12,583 Posts
Re: Porsche files judicial review over London congestion charge (8v_gti777)

Quote, originally posted by 8v_gti777 »
Greedy. http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif

Porsche is right and you are wrong. G'day.
good for them http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,215 Posts
Re: Porsche files judicial review over London congestion charge (GiacGtiAgain)

Quote, originally posted by GiacGtiAgain »

Porsche is right and you are wrong. G'day.
good for them http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif

Why
 

· Registered
Joined
·
924 Posts
Well, you might want to take into consideration the fact that an immediate reduction in CO2 emissions probably isn't the sole point of the increase.
Of course it's there to raise money. I'd like to know how the money will be spent or invested.
The increase will also act as a deterrent to owning and operating inefficient cars and hence an incentive to own or employ more efficient means of transportation, which could have greater effects than studies estimate.
Porsche is merely complaining because they're afraid less people will buy their cars. It's a natural reaction. I get angry if people reach for my wallet, too.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
8,634 Posts
Re: (Mikedav)

Funny how certain automakers fighting against CAFE and such were labelled as evil, stupid, etc. Howver, make it Porsche and suddenly the laws are pretty much seen as immoral and Porsche is the hero coming to save the day.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,694 Posts
Re: Porsche files judicial review over London congestion charge (Sledge)

Quote, originally posted by manboy »
Well, you might want to take into consideration the fact that an immediate reduction in CO2 emissions probably isn't the sole point of the increase. Of course it's there to raise money. I'd like to know how the money will be spent or invested.

Thats what we are being told it is. The truth is its to help plug a hole in Livingstones budget to pa for the Olympics in 2012.
Quote »
The increase will also act as a deterrent to owning and operating inefficient cars, and hence an incentive to own or employ more efficient means of transportation, which could have greater effects than studies estimate.

That is what 70% tax on fuel and national road tax is for (now in bands putting, roughly, all cars 2.8 litres above at £400 a year, 2.0-2.8 at £300 a year and everything else between nothing and £180 a year). This charge is on top of that because the mayor of one city has decided he can get away with it (or is trying to). Its a tax upon a tax. £25 per day is entirely unfair and not in line with the 'damage' caused by driving a 3.2 over, say, a 2.2. Thankfully its only for one city in a country of 60m people.
Quote »
Porsche is merely complaining because they're afraid less people will buy their cars. It's a natural reaction.

A company lobbying to protect its sales? Madness. Sure Porsche are worried about their sales but they have a valid point about economical impact vs. environmental impact. The reduction in emissions will be so fractional as to be meaningless, whereas the impact on business will be huge. I know plenty of small business owners - who drive Porsches and work hard, but aren't millionaires - who will be relocating their businesses due to this. Fair enough if they were literally destroying the environment with every trip they make, but that belies the facts...and as stated, they are already paying 'fines' for choosing an 'inefficient' (and I use the term loosely) vehicle via road tax and fuel tax.
Not to worry though, Ken will be out in the next mayoral election. Interestingly other major urban centres such as Birmingham and Manchester are growing exponentially on the back of these farcical policies.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top