ULEZ, Uxbridge by-election and the London 2024 Mayoral election

[WelshBluebird]

Which leads me to believe that if there was any slight chance of laying the blame for ULEZ expansion on to the Tory government, it would have been laid loud and clear by now. Instead we get this:

It is literally in the letter from the transport secretary at the time to the Mayor (linked to in my previous comment). Under the emergency funding agreement in 2020, the government forced TfL to, and I quote, "widen the scope and level" of the ULEZ charge.

 

[yorksrob]

Which leads me to believe that if there was any slight chance of laying the blame for ULEZ expansion on to the Tory government, it would have been laid loud and clear by now. Instead we get this:

I think that Labour were tongue tied as they (for decent reasons) agree with the policy.

They should have pushed harder on the "We agree with this policy, however it was introduced by a Tory government and we were required by the Government......." line to drive home the point that it was also a Tory policy.

That they didn't, I put down to a lack of ruthlessness.

Put simply, Labour don't want to admit that a policy they agree with, was also supported by the Conservatives, even though it would have debunked a Tory narrative.

Hopefully they will take this as a lesson for the General Election.

 

[Thirteen]

I do hope Susan Hall has more to her manifesto than just scrapping the ULEZ expansion and more police, what's her policy on TfL and getting more funding for example?

 

[duncanp]

If he is against private motoring in the capital, then my reaction is, good for him! London is choking from people needlessly making car journeys that often could perfectly well be made by less destructive means, and which clog up the roads, slowing down buses and also generally slowing down everyone else's travel.

This is a bit of a sweeping statement.

Many people would agree that there is too much traffic in London, but it is very judgemental to say to an individual person that their journey is "destructive" and "could be made by other means" without knowing their circumstances.

Part of the resentment against ULEZ which affected the Uxbridge result is the feeling that such statements, and the consequent decisions, are made by people who are comfortably off in Inner London which has better access to the tube, rail and bus services, than in Outer London, where services are less frequent.

Public transport in London is very much orientated towards getting people from the suburbs into the city centre, and if your commuting pattern or personal circumstances are not aligned with a convenient public transport service, then a car is pretty much essential.

Like it or not, if everyone gave up their cars, as some people seem to want them to do, then existing public transport services just could not cope.

 

[Thirteen]

The issues the outer Boroughs face is that the transport links are simply not good enough. Uxbridge and parts of Ruislip have the tube but places like Sutton and Orpington aren't so lucky. If I were Susan Hall or other Mayoral candidate, I'd be proposing getting those iced projects like the Sutton Link or the Bakerloo Line Extension back on the agenda as well as replacing aging rolling stock.

 

[Mikw]

I'll be willing to bet we'll get a diet of culture wars from Hall, and - if she wins - she won't scrap the ULEZ

 

[Enthusiast]

If he is against private motoring in the capital, then my reaction is, good for him! London is choking from people needlessly making car journeys that often could perfectly well be made by less destructive means, and which clog up the roads, slowing down buses and also generally slowing down everyone else's travel.

I think that shows a particular misunderstanding of travel in outer London.

Much of the expanded ULEZ zone is not choking from people "needlessly making car journeys that often could perfectly well be made by less destructive means". In fact, much of it is not choking particularly from anything much at all because it is countryside and farmland (as I have demonstrated on here before). But as well as that, many parts of outer London are not served particularly well by public transport. People have to move about. They have to go to work, to attend medical appointments and to generally get on with their lives.

More than that, many of the vehicles affected by the ULEZ regulations are vans belonging to small businesses. Try shifting a new boiler, ten lengths of copper tube and all a plumber's tools on the bus. The rural parts of parts of the outer London boroughs are simply not suited to life conducted solely on public transport. You can usually get to and from central London from many of them fairly easily (though often not late evenings or weekends) but getting around the periphery is often not very easy at all.

 

[telstarbox]

If you're a competent plumber working in Bexleyheath or Ruislip you can easily afford a compliant van.

 

[J-2739]

The issues the outer Boroughs face is that the transport links are simply not good enough. Uxbridge and parts of Ruislip have the tube but places like Sutton and Orpington aren't so lucky. If I were Susan Hall or other Mayoral candidate, I'd be proposing getting those iced projects like the Sutton Link or the Bakerloo Line Extension back on the agenda as well as replacing aging rolling stock.

That's one big problem with the ULEZ extension; punitive action against Outer London motorists without providing an attractive alternative of public transportation. I know there is the Superloop bus network, and the DLR extension to Thamesmead is on the cards, but is there anything more radical on the line?

 

[Simon11]

If you're a competent plumber working in Bexleyheath or Ruislip you can easily afford a compliant van.

Not sure what planet you are on, but easily looking at £10k for a brand new van to replace what could be just a 7 year old van.

Thats around two months the plumber will have to work for free to pay for an unnecessarily cost or have to pass on the costs to their customers which will have the biggest impact on the poorer parts of town.

Why cant they just keep it and upgrade to a cleaner vehicle when the time is right?

 

[telstarbox]

You can sell the old van outside London
You can spread the cost over a few years
Newer vans are more fuel efficient
And it's an expense so reduces the tax bill
Easily done.

 

[nw1]

In a general election one would expect the Lib Dems and Greens to do far better than they did in the by-election possibly taking more votes from Labour

Or not - in a general election, tactical voting is likely to be even more prevalent than in a byelection - as it's the only way to get the government you want (or dislike the least) in our electoral system.

Those that want to see the end of the Tories will do so by voting Labour in a seat like Uxbridge, as it's the only viable means to do so. Likewise, someone would vote Lib Dem to achieve the same aim in the Home Counties or West Country.

I would tend to agree that ULEZ is a factor here, but perhaps also Uxbridge has a certain combination of affluence and social conservatism that is likely to be the combination required for a Tory hold. Other parts of London are perhaps more liberal (so will reject the Tories), whereas many places in the North are less affluent (so will reject the Tories, but for different reasons).

(I am guessing here, I've never visited Uxbridge.)

 

[DynamicSpirit]

This is a bit of a sweeping statement.

Many people would agree that there is too much traffic in London, but it is very judgemental to say to an individual person that their journey is "destructive" and "could be made by other means" without knowing their circumstances.

When I'm making that statement, I'm not picking on any particular journey, and I'm not saying that all journeys could be made by public transport. But I don't think it's controversial to point out that a good proportion of the journeys that people in outer London currently make by car could be made by other means if only the person making the journey put in a bit more consideration to others: In fact, as I write that I'm thinking of one person I know how routinely drives her car a distance of about 1/4 mile when going out because she prefers that to doing the 5 minute walk (which she's perfectly capable of). As for saying that a journey is 'destructive': I would think that, if you consider the vast amount of harm that each car journey causes, that is rather obviously a statement of fact. I'm not trying to be judgemental to others - I'm simply pointing out reality. Of course I recognise that there are many journeys for which there are no other practical alternatives - the most obvious ones being trades people who have to take heavy tools with them. The irony here is that if you could persuade the people who can use other means to travel to do so, then the roads would be much less congested which means that those who genuinely have to use their cars to make necessary journeys would find they can get around more quickly.

 

[nw1]

Do a significant number of students actually change their voting address? My experience of university (albeit a few years ago) was that most students who cared about politics would go back "home" for a long weekend to enable voting on the Thursday prior to the long weekend. I don't know why they couldn't just do a postal vote...

When I was a student I voted in my university seat, travelling there during the Easter holidays specifically to vote.

And while the outcome in that seat was not what I wanted, it was at least a close contest, and I felt that my real "home" by then was my university town anyway. I felt that my vote could have made that difference.

The family address was in the sort of seat which has probably been Tory since 1832 so a vote there would have been utterly wasted.

I have a friend who both lives in the constituency and voted in the by election. The Tories made their usual points about clean air zones but were quick to criticize the labor London assembly implementation of the ultra low emissions zone and all its flaws and faults for stop the labor candidate haven't got anything whatsoever of use or value to say when challenged about it and didn't even stand up in defence

This according to my friend was really all that the majority of voters needed to know. If they can't actually put up a fight against one of their parties flagship policies within greater London then why bother was my friend's opinion


I also think this is a highly useful for taste of things to come. Not sure if there will be any further London Westminster by elections between now and the mayoral election but a couple more defeats like that will pretty much set the scene on what's going to happen at city hall next year.

Do the majority of Londoners live in the outer suburbs, though, or do more live in the inner areas?

I can see there being a Tory swing in already-conservative outer areas such as Barnet, Chingford, Romford, Bexley, Bromley, Orpington, South Croydon and the like - but I suspect in the more liberal inner areas, enough people dislike the rhetoric of the likes of Braverman that they are unlikely to bring themselves to vote for a Tory mayor. I can't see areas such as Putney and Wandsworth, which have swung leftwards recently, for example, voting Tory in the mayoral election.

I do hope Susan Hall has more to her manifesto than just scrapping the ULEZ expansion and more police, what's her policy on TfL and getting more funding for example?

It wouldn't surprise me to see a programme of service cuts and fare increases if a Tory Mayor comes in.

But as I said, the dislike of the Tories in the inner, and even middle, boroughs means that I suspect the Tory won't get in.

Uxbridge, Romford, Bexley and the like might dislike Labour and like the Tories, but at the end of the day, they account for only a minority of the population.

 

[deltic]

Do the majority of Londoners live in the outer suburbs, though, or do more live in the inner areas?

I can see there being a Tory swing in already-conservative outer areas such as Barnet, Chingford, Romford, Bexley, Bromley, Orpington, South Croydon and the like - but I suspect in the more liberal inner areas, enough people dislike the rhetoric of the likes of Braverman that they are unlikely to bring themselves to vote for a Tory mayor. I can't see areas such as Putney and Wandsworth, which have swung leftwards recently, for example, voting Tory in the mayoral election.



It wouldn't surprise me to see a programme of service cuts and fare increases if a Tory Mayor comes in.

But as I said, the dislike of the Tories in the inner, and even middle, boroughs means that I suspect the Tory won't get in.

Uxbridge, Romford, Bexley and the like might dislike Labour and like the Tories, but at the end of the day, they account for only a minority of the population.

The population of outer London is far bigger than that of inner London

 

[nw1]

The population of outer London is far bigger than that of inner London

I'm surprised, I guess it depends on what category mid-range places like Putney, Wandsworth, Streatham, Crystal Palace and the like are in. I'd have classed these as inner London but may be wrong.

Whatever the case, I'd expect there would be a lot of anti-Tory sentiment right out to these mid-range places.

 

[Simon11]

You can sell the old van outside London
You can spread the cost over a few years
Newer vans are more fuel efficient
And it's an expense so reduces the tax bill
Easily done.

Hundreds of thousands of people need to change their vehicles in London. Guess what, demand and supply means the value of their old non compliant vehicle has plummeted while compliant vehicle costs are going through the roof.

Second-hand car prices up 45pc thanks to Ulez expansion

Only around 5,000 cars under £5,000 available that are able to drive into zone without charge, data suggest

www.telegraph.co.uk

“Easily done” Not really!

 

[J-2739]

(I am guessing here, I've never visited Uxbridge.)

Having been to Uxbridge myself several times, and wandered round the place, I somewhat get the impression that it wasn't the town itself that tipped the balance, but the smaller villages nearby?

 

[edwin_m]

I can see there being a Tory swing in already-conservative outer areas such as Barnet, Chingford, Romford, Bexley, Bromley, Orpington, South Croydon and the like - but I suspect in the more liberal inner areas, enough people dislike the rhetoric of the likes of Braverman that they are unlikely to bring themselves to vote for a Tory mayor. I can't see areas such as Putney and Wandsworth, which have swung leftwards recently, for example, voting Tory in the mayoral election.
...
But as I said, the dislike of the Tories in the inner, and even middle, boroughs means that I suspect the Tory won't get in.

Uxbridge, Romford, Bexley and the like might dislike Labour and like the Tories, but at the end of the day, they account for only a minority of the population.

I agree the Tories have little chance in most inner London seats. As well as other factors, the effects of pollution and excessive driving are more obvious here and most (not all) journeys can be done easily by public transport, so opposition to ULEZ is unlikely to play well here.

Further out the LibDems become a factor, holding three seats in south-west London and being tipped to take more in areas such as Hertfordshire and Surrey. The Tories may find themselves squeezed into a series of outer London seats that is more an onion ring than a doughnut.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I agree the Tories have little chance in most inner London seats. As well as other factors, the effects of pollution and excessive driving are more obvious here and most (not all) journeys can be done easily by public transport, so opposition to ULEZ is unlikely to play well here.

Indeed. And it's worth pointing out that pollution does travel to some extent and therefore some of the intense pollution in inner London is the result of people driving cars in outer London and the pollution then drifting in. It's not the simple situation some people seem to be trying to make out where, pollution on the edge of London is low therefore no need for ULEZ there: If you're driving a high-polluting vehicle on the edge of London then you are likely to be adding at least somewhat to pollution in other nearby places where it's already far too high - most notably, inner London.

 

[Enthusiast]

I'm surprised, I guess it depends on what category mid-range places like Putney, Wandsworth, Streatham, Crystal Palace and the like are in. I'd have classed these as inner London but may be wrong.

In 2020 (the latest figures I have without refreshing them) the population of Inner London was around 3.3m and Outer London was 5.1m.

Of the places you mention, all are classed as Inner London with the exception of Crystal Palace. This lies on the extreme north west boundary of the London Borough of Bromley. This is the largest London borough and extends from there to the border with Kent (where it includes a considerable area of open countryside and farmland).

 

[nw1]

In 2020 (the latest figures I have without refreshing them) the population of Inner London was around 3.3m and Outer London was 5.1m.

Of the places you mention, all are classed as Inner London with the exception of Crystal Palace. This lies on the extreme north west boundary of the London Borough of Bromley. This is the largest London borough and extends from there to the border with Kent (where it includes a considerable area of open countryside and farmland).

Interesting... and surprising. I never thought Crystal Palace was in Bromley, I'd have guessed either Croydon or whatever borough Streatham is in.

However, I do see, looking at Wikipedia, the definition of "Outer London" is wider than I assumed. I note that Croydon, Brent, Ealing and Haringey are classed as Outer London, which, certainly for the last three, surprises me. That I think makes a considerable difference. The last three of those four are almost dead-cert Labour I suspect, despite being "Outer London", while Croydon seems to be split between ultra-conservative South Croydon and the Labour-leaning remainder, AFAIK.

Other "Outer London" boroughs which I think will vote Labour include Hounslow, and Waltham Forest, based on historical tendencies. So I think the Tories will do very well to win the mayoral election next year. Think they'll need places like Wandsworth and Richmond to do so, which might be a struggle.

 

[Enthusiast]

Interesting... and surprising. I never thought Crystal Palace was in Bromley, I'd have guessed either Croydon or whatever borough Streatham is in.

However, I do see, looking at Wikipedia, the definition of "Outer London" is wider than I assumed. I note that Croydon, Brent, Ealing and Haringey are classed as Outer London, which, certainly for the last three, surprises me. That I think makes a considerable difference. The last three of those four are almost dead-cert Labour I suspect, despite being "Outer London", while Croydon seems to be split between ultra-conservative South Croydon and the Labour-leaning remainder, AFAIK.

Other "Outer London" boroughs which I think will vote Labour include Hounslow, and Waltham Forest, based on historical tendencies. So I think the Tories will do very well to win the mayoral election next year. Think they'll need places like Wandsworth and Richmond to do so, which might be a struggle.

For the figures I provided, the following London boroughs were considered “Inner London”:

Camden
Hackney & City of London
Hammersmith
Haringey
Islington
Kensington & Chelsea
Lambeth
Lewisham
Newham
Southwark
Tower Hamlets
Wandsworth
Westminster

“Outer London”:

Barking & Dagenham
Barnet
Bexley
Brent
Bromley
Croydon
Ealing
Enfield
Greenwich
Harrow
Havering
Hillingdon
Hounslow
Kingston
Merton
Redbridge
Richmond
Sutton
Waltham Forest

 

[Busaholic]

If you're a competent plumber working in Bexleyheath or Ruislip you can easily afford a compliant van.

It's all those incompetent ones I worry about.

 

[geoffk]

This discussion, and the earlier one about Low Traffic Neighbourhoods in Oxford, suggests that we are in danger of seeing a rapid growth in "climate populism". ULEZ and LTNs are different of course and have different aims but they are easily conflated in the public mind as being "anti motorist" and a threat to an established way of life. Opponents of these plans appear much more vocal than their supporters. There is a parallel perhaps with Brexit and those who support efforts to reduce traffic and improve air quality need to put out a positive message about the benefits of these schemes.

The Tory government is already dragging its feet on many of its climate commitments. If the narrative that a green agenda equals losing votes is allowed to take hold, we may see them setting environmental policies aside altogether. Former Brexit negotiator Lord Frost says of Uxbridge - “The lesson is surely that green policies are very unpopular when there's a direct cost to people. This time that hit Labour. But soon it could be us unless we rethink heat pumps and the 2030 electric car deadline.” Meanwhile Labour must stick to its guns on climate and not back away from unpopular action. There is already pressure on Keir Starmer to lean on Sadiq Khan to delay or scrap the ULEZ expansion.

What's missing of course is the "carrot" of better public transport!

 

[nw1]

I do thin

This discussion, and the earlier one about Low Traffic Neighbourhoods in Oxford, suggests that we are in danger of seeing a rapid growth in "climate populism". ULEZ and LTNs are different of course and have different aims but they are easily conflated in the public mind as being "anti motorist" and a threat to an established way of life. Opponents of these plans appear much more vocal than their supporters. There is a parallel perhaps with Brexit and those who support efforts to reduce traffic and improve air quality need to put out a positive message about the benefits of these schemes.

The Tory government is already dragging its feet on many of its climate commitments. If the narrative that a green agenda equals losing votes is allowed to take hold, we may see them setting environmental policies aside altogether. Former Brexit negotiator Lord Frost says of Uxbridge - “The lesson is surely that green policies are very unpopular when there's a direct cost to people. This time that hit Labour. But soon it could be us unless we rethink heat pumps and the 2030 electric car deadline.” Meanwhile Labour must stick to its guns on climate and not back away from unpopular action. There is already pressure on Keir Starmer to lean on Sadiq Khan to delay or scrap the ULEZ expansion.

What's missing of course is the "carrot" of better public transport!

A good point and I do think that governments in general - and not just UK ones - seem to be very prone to accepting demands from right-wing populists, more so than left-wing populists for example.

As for expanding ULEZ, I think it's a good idea in principle but people need financial help to make the necessary upgrades - which is what the politicians seem to be missing.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Interesting... and surprising. I never thought Crystal Palace was in Bromley, I'd have guessed either Croydon or whatever borough Streatham is in.

However, I do see, looking at Wikipedia, the definition of "Outer London" is wider than I assumed. I note that Croydon, Brent, Ealing and Haringey are classed as Outer London, which, certainly for the last three, surprises me. That I think makes a considerable difference. The last three of those four are almost dead-cert Labour I suspect, despite being "Outer London", while Croydon seems to be split between ultra-conservative South Croydon and the Labour-leaning remainder, AFAIK.

Other "Outer London" boroughs which I think will vote Labour include Hounslow, and Waltham Forest, based on historical tendencies. So I think the Tories will do very well to win the mayoral election next year. Think they'll need places like Wandsworth and Richmond to do so, which might be a struggle.

I feel that for this kind of analysis, the idea of inner/outer London is a bit too crude. I'd suggest you should think of about 4 areas:

1. Central London - stretching out to Canary Wharf. Broadly zones 1 and 2. This has a high proportion of single people, and relatively few people have a car - so most rely on public transport. Social attitudes are predominantly left-liberal and ULEZ won't be an issue here: If anything most people are likely to support it.
2. The area roughly corresponding to Oyster zones 3-4. This is politically very similar to central London, but you'll get more families living here, and car use is a bit higher.
3. Real outer London. Places like Romford, Bromley, Uxbridge, and Kingston. Demographically more similar to the neighbouring counties than to central London, and social attitudes to match. These are the kinds of areas where metropolitan left-liberal politics won't play as well and the Tory vote is often correspondingly higher. Car use is much higher and ULEZ likely to be much less popular - exactly the areas where the Tories can capitalise on it.

I said 4 areas not 3, because I would split 3 into two: 3a - places like Kingston that border middle class Remain-inclined counties and favour the 'Ken Clarke/David Cameron' brand of Toryism and where the LibDems would have good prospects (or even already have MPs), and 3b - places like Romford and Bromley that are much more Leave-inclined (The 'Iain Duncan Smith' brand of Toryism), and which are likely to remain the last Tory strongholds in London.

Obviously even that is a heavy simplification, but I suspect it's more realistic and more useful than a straight inner/outer London split.

 

[nw1]

I feel that for this kind of analysis, the idea of inner/outer London is a bit too crude. I'd suggest you should think of about 4 areas:

1. Central London - stretching out to Canary Wharf. Broadly zones 1 and 2. This has a high proportion of single people, and relatively few people have a car - so most rely on public transport. Social attitudes are predominantly left-liberal and ULEZ won't be an issue here: If anything most people are likely to support it.
2. The area roughly corresponding to Oyster zones 3-4. This is politically very similar to central London, but you'll get more families living here, and car use is a bit higher.
3. Real outer London. Places like Romford, Bromley, Uxbridge, and Kingston. Demographically more similar to the neighbouring counties than to central London, and social attitudes to match. These are the kinds of areas where metropolitan left-liberal politics won't play as well and the Tory vote is often correspondingly higher. Car use is much higher and ULEZ likely to be much less popular - exactly the areas where the Tories can capitalise on it.

I said 4 areas not 3, because I would split 3 into two: 3a - places like Kingston that border middle class Remain-inclined counties and favour the 'Ken Clarke/David Cameron' brand of Toryism and where the LibDems would have good prospects (or even already have MPs), and 3b - places like Romford and Bromley that are much more Leave-inclined (The 'Iain Duncan Smith' brand of Toryism), and which are likely to remain the last Tory strongholds in London.

Obviously even that is a heavy simplification, but I suspect it's more realistic and more useful than a straight inner/outer London split.

I will admit I am not a Londoner so will admit my analysis was a bit crude, as you say. I think yours is a good analysis on the whole.

I'd also add the "Wandsworth / Putney" category which is inner London (ish) but relatively affluent, but also very liberal. Perhaps that would be a mid-point between somewhere like Kingston and somewhere like Lambeth, both metaphorically and geographically. It's interesting to note that Putney was the only Labour gain in the last election, which seems to indicate the direction of travel for this area. Also presumably this part of London is already under ULEZ.

I'd tend to agree that 3a are unlikely to veer Tory, either in the Mayoral or general elections next year - and any Tory London mayor cannot win simply by capturing the votes of 3b.

Croydon is a strange one as it seems to be almost a 50:50 mix of liberal inner London and "Duncan Smith" conservatism, which means it's always a difficult one to call.

 

[317 forever]

From what I have seen, the bus network is a bit thinner than average for Greater London in Uxbridge and also Bromley, another borough who have been vocal against the expansion of ULEZ.

I can therefore understand these boroughs being more against ULEZ as a result.

Looking at your posts @DynamicSpirit and @nw1 I broadly agree with your classifications of London demographics. As regards Croydon being 50:50 I'd say it's areas north of the tram that are liberal inner London and south of the tram more clearly suburban.

 

[Thirteen]

If Susan Hall wants to beat Sadiq Khan, she needs to offer more to the inner London voter, scrapping the ULEZ expansion is one thing but what you replace it with but also how do you improve the things Londoners actually care about?