London congestion charge
179439
move=:edit=
225779134
2008-07-15T10:42:11Z
Rjwilmsi
203434
gen fixes + link/fix date fields in cite templates (explanation [[User:Rjwilmsi#My_correction_of_dates_in_templates|here]]) using [[Project:AutoWikiBrowser|AWB]]
[[Image:London Congestion Charge, Old Street, England.jpg|thumb|At Old Street, street markings and a sign (inset) with the white-on-red C alert drivers to the charge. The sign displays the original operating hours for the scheme.]]
The '''London congestion charge''' is a fee for some motorists travelling within those parts of [[London]] designated as the Congestion Charge Zone (CCZ). The main objectives of this charge are to reduce congestion, and to raise funds for investment in London's transport system. The zone came into operation in parts of [[Central London]] on [[17 February]] [[2003]] and it was extended into parts of [[West London]] on [[19 February]] [[2007]]. Although not the first scheme of its kind in the [[United Kingdom]], it was the largest when it was introduced, and it remains one of the largest in the world. Worldwide, several cities have referenced the London scheme when considering their own possible schemes. A payment of [[Pound sterling|£]]8 is required for each day a chargeable vehicle enters or travels within the zone between 7am and 6pm; a fine of between £60 and £180 is imposed for non-payment.
The organisation responsible for the charge is [[Transport for London]] (TfL); [[Capita Group]] operates the scheme under contract. The system is run on a generally automatic basis using [[CCTV]] and [[Automatic Number Plate Recognition]].
==Coverage==
===Area covered by the charge===
The boundary of the zone, as of [[19 February]] [[2007]], starts at the northern end of Vauxhall Bridge and (travelling in a clockwise direction) heads along the northern bank of the [[River Thames]] as Grosvenor Road, the [[Chelsea Embankment]] and [[Cheyne Walk]]. From there, it heads north, along the eastern edges of the [[Kensington]] and [[Earl's Court]] one-way systems, part of the [[A3220 road|A3220]], with the roads in between charged, before continuing to the [[A40 road|A40]] [[Westway (London)|Westway]] as the [[Holland Road (London)|Holland Road]] and the [[West Cross Route]]. The boundary then includes parts of [[North Kensington]], but the actual boundary is defined by the [[West London Line]] railway track, which runs between Latimer Road (inside the zone) and [[Wood Lane]] (outside the zone), until Scrubs Lane, before turning east, following the [[Great Western Main Line]] out of [[Paddington Station|Paddington]] towards [[Ladbroke Grove]]. Here, the boundary follows the [[Grand Union Canal]] and rejoins the existing zone at [[Edgware Road]] after skirting [[Paddington]], by way of the Bishop's Bridge Road, Eastbourne Terrace, [[Praed Street]] and Sussex Gardens.<ref name="guardianQA">{{cite web |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/theissues/article/0,,519534,00.html |title=Q&A: The congestion charge |coauthors=Simon Jeffery and Sarah Phillips |work=The Guardian |publisher=Guardian News and Media |date=2006-08-07 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref>
[[Transport for London|TfL]] has defined some free through routes, where drivers do not have to pay the charge. The main route is defined by the western boundary of the original zone [[Vauxhall Bridge Road]], [[Grosvenor Place]], [[Park Lane]] and [[Edgware Road]], with some additions around [[Victoria, London|Victoria]]. The [[Westway (London)|Westway]] is the other exempt route.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2006/11/09/congestion_through_roads_feature.shtml |title=Congestion Charge Through Roads |date=2007-02-22 |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |work=BBC London |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref>
===Original area covered===
[[Image:London congestion charge zone.png|thumb|Until [[18 February]] [[2007]] the congestion charge applied to drivers within the highlighted area.]]
The original boundary of the zone ([[2003-02-17]] – [[2007-02-18]]) was largely the [[London Inner Ring Road]]. Starting at the northernmost point and moving clockwise, the major roads defining the boundary were [[Pentonville Road]], [[City Road]], [[Old Street]], [[Commercial Street (London)|Commercial Street]], [[Mansell Street (London)|Mansell Street]], [[Tower Bridge Road]], [[New Kent Road]], [[Elephant and Castle]], [[Vauxhall Bridge Road]], [[Park Lane (road)|Park Lane]], [[Edgware Road]], [[Marylebone Road]] and [[Euston Road]] (other roads filled the small gaps between these roads). The zone therefore included the whole of the [[City of London]], the financial district, and the [[West End of London|West End]], London's primary commercial and entertainment centre.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/uk/03/congestion_charge/exemptions_guide/html/what.stm |title=What it is |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2003 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref> There were 136,000 residents living within the zone (of a total population of around 7,000,000 in [[Greater London]]), though the zone was primarily thought of (and zoned) as commercial rather than residential. There was little heavy industry within the zone. Signs were erected and symbols painted on the road to help drivers recognise the congestion charge area.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cclondon.com/signsandsymbol.shtml |title=Signs and Symbols |work=CCLondon.com |publisher=[[Transport for London]] |accessdate=2007-05-27}}</ref>
==Payment and concessions==
===Payment===
[[Image:London-cc-mobile-l.jpg|thumb|right|Closed-circuit cameras and vans police the zone, capturing live video. Vans can be identified by a sticker on the back door (inset).]]
As of [[4 July]] [[2005]], the non-discounted daily charge for non-exempt vehicles is [[Pound sterling|£]]8, or £7 for fleet vehicles.<ref name="bbc20050401">{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4399059.stm |title=Congestion charge increases to £8 |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2005-04-01 |accessdate=2006-05-25}}</ref> Any applicable daily charge must be paid for a vehicle that is on a public road in the Congestion Charge Zone between 7 am and 6 pm, Monday to Friday,<ref>{{cite web |url=https://tfl-cc.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/tfl_cc.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=1727&p_created=1121868980&p_sid=dLBxPsRi&p_accessibility=0&p_redirect=&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX3Jvd19jbnQ9MjgmcF9wcm9kcz0mcF9jYXRzPSZwX3B2PSZwX2N2PSZwX3BhZ2U9MSZwX3NlYXJjaF90ZXh0PXBhcmtlZA**&p_li=&p_topview=1 |title=I live in the Congestion Charging Zone. Do I have to pay if my car is parked and I don't move it during charging hours? |publisher=[[Transport for London]] |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6368957.stm |title= Congestion Charge Zone increases |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2007-02-19 |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref> excluding [[List of holidays by country#United Kingdom and Crown dependencies|public holidays]] in England and a period over Christmas.<ref name="bbc20041019">{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3756330.stm |title=Road toll stopped over Christmas |date=2004-10-19 |accessdate=2007-05-26 |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation}}</ref> Drivers may pay the charge via a [[website]], by [[Short message service|SMS]] text message, in shops equipped with a [[PayPoint]], or by phone.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2006/10/31/congestion_payment_feature.shtml |work=BBC London |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation|title=How to pay the charge |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref> The charge may be paid the day after at an increased cost of £10.
While private drivers are obliged to pay the charge either the day before, on the day or on the following day, whether they are seen to enter the zone or not, the same does not apply to fleets of business vehicles. A business can register a group of vehicles with TfL, and is charged £7 per visit for all vehicles in the fleet detected by the cameras. In May 2005, businessman Miguel Camacho set up fivepounds.co.uk, whose sole function was to sign up private drivers to their "fleet", thus offering the convenience of not having to pay the charge pro-actively, avoiding fines in the case of a forgotten journey and also potentially getting a "free journey" if undetected by the cameras. TfL, which obtains nearly half of its net revenue from fines, moved quickly to quash the loophole, by demanding that fleet operators provide the [[vehicle register|registration document]] for each vehicle in their fleet. Fivepounds went out of business on [[26 February]] [[2006]].<ref>{{cite news |first=David |last=Williams |url=http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-18482241-details/TfL+changes+rules+to+stop+C-charge+%27fleet%27+scheme/article.do;jsessionid=kZk2HQcLn3zvTN1PT229XqYqhSJ5Y3syqRlLQfl2QlnXNLLxgcJp!-647369553!-1407319224!7001!-1 |title=TfL changes rules to stop C-charge 'fleet' scheme |work=Evening Standard |publisher=Associated Newspapers Limited |date=2005-05-09 |accessdate=2008-01-06}}</ref>
===Exemptions and discounts===
Some vehicles such as [[London buses|bus]]es, minibuses (over a certain size), [[Hackney carriage|taxi]]s, ambulances, fire engines and police vehicles, motorcycles, [[Peel P50|very small three-wheelers]], [[alternative fuel]] vehicles and bicycles are exempt from the charge, although some of the exemptions are 100% discounts that still require registration.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2006/10/30/congestioncharge_feature.shtml |title=Congestion Charging in London |date=2007-04-05 |accessdate=2007-05-26 |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |work=BBC London}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cclondon.com/exemptions.shtml |title=Exemptions & Discounts |work=CCLondon.com |publisher=[[Transport for London]]|accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref> Residents of the zone are eligible for a 90% discount if they pay the charge for a week or more at once, although there are administration charges – presently a minimum of £10 – for claiming the discount.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cclondon.com/secure/dynamicpages/discount/WF_PreRegIntroduction_W.aspx |title=Residents' Provisional Registration - Introduction |work=CCLondon.com |publisher=[[Transport for London]] |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref> Some residents who live close to the West London extension are also entitled to the resident's discount.<ref name="bbcextfeature">{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2006/10/30/westernextention_feature.shtml |title=The Western Extension |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |work=BBC London |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6368957.stm |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2007-02-19 |title= Congestion Charge Zone increases |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-15986644-details/Discounts+offer+in+%27buffer+zone%27+for+C-charge/article.do;jsessionid=hX0fHH1fjplDWh1zv1yybWKMKLMN262hQ1dJttlCW4b2myXW2GnG!713535882!-1407319226!7001!-1 |title=Discounts offer in 'buffer zone' for C-charge |first=Ross |last=Lydall |work=Evening Standard |publisher=Associated News |date=2005-01-18 |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref>
Drivers of foreign-registered vehicles are not exempt from the charge but the current lack of an international legal framework for the assessment and collection of traffic fines makes enforcement and recovery difficult. In 2005, ''[[The Guardian]]'' obtained documentation under the [[Freedom of Information Act 2000]] which showed that out of 65,534 tickets issued to non UK registered vehicles, only 1,993 had been collected.<ref name="guardian20050315">{{cite news |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2005/mar/15/londonpolitics.freedomofinformation |title=TfL axes C-charge debt collection agency |work=The Guardian |date=2005-03-15 |accessdate=2008-01-06 |first=Andrew |last=Clakr |publisher=Guardian News and Media Limited}}</ref>
In October 2005, it was reported that two London [[embassy|embassies]], those of the United States and Germany, were not paying the charge as they considered it to be a tax, which they are protected from paying under the [[Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations|Vienna Convention]]. Some other embassies do pay the charge.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2005/10/18/congestion_diplomats_feature.shtml |title=Road toll leads to diplomatic row |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2005-10-18 |accessdate=2006-04-08}}</ref> By May 2006, it was reported, the US embassy owed £270,000 in fines for non-payment. A TfL spokesperson stated that US embassies do pay tolls in [[Oslo]] and [[Singapore]]. TfL argues that the charge is a toll, not a tax.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4770293.stm |title=Embassy road toll row continues |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2006-05-14 |accessdate=2006-05-25}}</ref> In April 2006, after not paying it since its introduction in February 2003, the embassy of the United Arab Emirates decided that its diplomats would now pay the charge.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4881442.stm |title=Embassy to pay congestion charge |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2006-04-06 |accessdate=2006-05-25}}</ref>
TfL can and does suspend the congestion charge either in a small local area to cope with incidents and if directed to do so by a [[police officer]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://tfl-cc.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/tfl_cc.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=1652&p_created=1121859571&p_sid=mIBG4ACi&p_accessibility=0&p_redirect=&p_lva=&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPTEmcF9zb3J0X2J5PSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX3Jvd19jbnQ9MiZwX3Byb2RzPSZwX2NhdHM9JnBfcHY9JnBfY3Y9JnBfcGFnZT0xJnBfc2VhcmNoX3RleHQ9ZGl2ZXJzaW9u&p_li=&p_topview=1 |title= Will I have to pay the Charge if I am diverted into the Zone? |publisher=[[Transport for London]] |accessdate=2007-05-27}}</ref> The congestion charge was suspended on [[7 July]] and [[8 July]] [[2005]], in response to the [[7 July 2005 London bombings|terrorist attacks on London Transport]].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.forbes.com/work/feeds/afx/2005/07/07/afx2128894.html |title=London Bombs Roundup Four terrorist blasts kill at least 37 people Update |publisher=Forbes |author=AFX News Limited |accessdate=2007-05-26 |date=2005-07-07}}</ref>
===Penalties and avoidance===
Failure to pay results in a fine of £120, reduced to £60 if paid within 14 days, but increases to £180 if unpaid after 28 days.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cclondon.com/Penalties-Enforcement.shtml |title=Penalties and Enforcement |work=CCLondon.com |publisher=[[Transport for London]] |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref> Although avoidance has become more sophisticated, compliance with the scheme and terms of payment has improved over the last few years, as is evidenced by the income from penalties dropping by approximately a quarter between 2005 and 2007. However, even after charges were increased, enforcement charges still make up a significant proportion of the net revenues.<ref name=tfljune2005/><ref name=tfljune2007/> Several newspapers have reported that copied [[British car number plates|number plates]] are being used to avoid the congestion charge, resulting in vehicle owners receiving penalty notices for failure to pay when their vehicles have not been inside the zone. TfL has stated it is keeping a database of these numbers and that they will trigger an alert.<ref name="bbc20040624">{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/3837349.stm |date=2004-06-24 |title=Car cloners try avoiding charges |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref><ref name="i20030326">{{cite news |url=http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20030226/ai_n12672682 |title=London congestion charge leads to flood of false number plates |publisher=The Independent |date=2003-02-26 |first=Charles |last=Arthur |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref><ref name="wsj20030226">{{cite news |url=http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB119396467957679995-knn9B_El5rlJmyW5kOqDAjV6v_w_20071201.html?mod=tff_main_tff_top |title=London's Congestion Fee Begets Pinched Plates |work=The Wall Street Journal |date=2003-02-26 |first=Niraj |last=Sheth |accessdate=2008-01-05}}</ref>
In 2007, TfL was informed by a ''green motoring website'' of their allegation, that owners of luxury cars were registering their vehicles as minicabs in order to use the exemption for these vehicles. Registering a vehicle as a minicab costs £82, plus a £27 per year licence fee resulting in a substantial saving over the cost of paying the congestion charge. TfL responded that it carried out regular checks to confirm that cars were being used for the purposes they were registered for, and that they had not revealed any such cases.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-1291533,00.html |work=sky.com |title=Minicab Scam To Avoid Congestion Charge |date=2007-11-05 |accessdate=2007-11-21 |publisher=British Sky Broadcasting}}</ref>
==Operations and technology==
Whilst TfL is responsible for the scheme, the operation is sub-contracted to an outside company. From the scheme's inception, Capita Group has been responsible for its day-to-day operation under a five-year contract worth around £230m.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2003/02/21/192717/capita-admits-congestion-charge-teething-problems.htm |title=Capita admits congestion charge 'teething problems' |first=James |last=Rogers |date=2003-02-21 |work=Computer Weekly |publisher=Reed Business Information}}</ref> Having been threatened with the termination of the contract by Livingstone for poor performance, when the zone was subsequently extended, Capita was awarded an extension to the original contract up until February 2009 to cover the expanded zone.<ref name="guardian-capita">{{cite news |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/congestion/story/0,12768,1389270,00.html |work=The Guardian |title=Capita congestion charge contract to be extended |first=Andrew |last=Clark |date=2005-12-13 |accessdate=2007-11-21 |publisher=Guardian News and Media Limited}}</ref> Capita has employed sub-contractors including [[Mastek]], based in [[Mumbai]], [[India]], who are responsible for much of the Information Technology infrastructure. Due to the wide spread around the globe of sub-contractors and because some data protection regulations vary from country to country, the scheme has prompted concerns about privacy from technology specialists.<ref>{{cite news | first=John |last=Lettice |url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/02/21/the_london_charge_zone/ |title=The London charge zone, the DP Act, and MS .NET |work=The Register |date=2003-02-21 |accessdate=2006-04-08}}</ref> Transport for London have announced that from 2009 [[IBM]] will operate the charge, along with the [[London low emission zone|low emission zone]] under contract.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7062030.stm |title=Capita to lose congestion charge |date=2007-10-25 |accessdate=2007-11-21 |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation}}</ref>
The scheme makes use of [[Closed-circuit television|CCTV]] cameras to record vehicles entering and exiting the zone. Cameras can record number plates with a 90% accuracy rate through [[automatic number plate recognition]] (ANPR) technology.<ref name="preparing">{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2748319.stm |title=Preparing for Congestion |first=Tom |last=Symonds |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2003-02-11 |accessdate=2007-05-27}}</ref><ref name="wasted">{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5098642.stm |title=C-charge plans 'will waste £166m' |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2003-02-11 |accessdate=2007-05-27}}</ref> There are also a number of mobile camera units which may be deployed anywhere in the zone. The majority of vehicles within the zone are captured on camera. The cameras take two still pictures in colour and black and white and use [[infrared]] technology to identify the number plates. These identified numbers are checked against the list of [[payee]]s overnight by computer. In those cases when a number plate has not been recognised then they are checked by humans.<ref name="preparing" /> Those that have paid but have not been seen in the central zone are not refunded, and those that have not paid and are seen are fined. The registered owner of such a vehicle is looked up in a database provided by the [[Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency]] (DVLA), based in [[Swansea]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/uk/03/congestion_charge/exemptions_guide/html/works.stm |title=How it Works |accessdate=2007-05-27 |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation}}</ref> The cameras can be fooled by [[tail gating]] or switching lanes at the correct time.<ref name="preparing" />
==Road charges==
===Road tolls===
{{main|Toll road}}
[[Image:Cc-london-sign-out.jpg|thumb|right|Signs indicate the boundary of the congestion charge area.]]
Historically, private toll roads, funded by [[turnpike trust]]s, were common from the late 1600s until the [[Local Government Act 1888]] passed ownership and responsibility to [[county councils|county]] and [[county borough]] councils.<ref name="turnpiketime">{{cite web |url=http://www.geog.port.ac.uk/webmap/hantsmap/hantsmap/turnpike.htm |title=Timeline of British Turnpike Trusts |publisher=University of Portsmouth, Department of Geography |accessdate=2007-11-18}}</ref>
As a result the use of roads in the [[United Kingdom]] is generally free of charge, subject to the payment of the [[road fund licence]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10021514 |title=Car tax rules |work=Directgov |accessdate=2007-11-18}}</ref> However, there are specific sections of public roads that remained tolled, which are mainly [[List of toll bridges#United Kingdom|bridge]]s and [[Toll tunnel|tunnel]]s as well as the [[M6 toll]] motorway.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6382211.stm |title=Q&A: Road pricing |date=2007-02-21 |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref> Of the many previously existing toll roads in London<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.georgianindex.net/ldn_tollgates/Toll_gate.html|title=Tollgates of London|accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref> there remains one, College Road in [[Dulwich]], which is privately owned by [[Dulwich College]] but accessible by the public.<ref>{{cite hansard | url=http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm199495/cmhansrd/1994-12-19/Writtens-1.html | house=House of Commons | date=[[2004-12-19]] | column=875 }}</ref>
Road tolls have been advocated by many others in the past, such as the 18th century economist [[Adam Smith]], as a way of directly funding the construction and maintenance of routes.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://policyinstitute.info/news-events/should-darling-travel-down-smiths-road-pricing-route/ |publisher=The Policy Institute |title=Should Darling travel down Smith's road pricing route? |first=Tom |last=Miers |date=2003-07-07 |accessdate=2007-05-27}}</ref>
===Road pricing===
{{main|Road pricing}}
The [[Her Majesty's Government|government]]'s [[Smeed Report]] of 1964 was the first full assessment of the practicality of road pricing in a British city on the basis of congestion.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/transport/Story/0,2763,1503017,00.html |title=Q&A: National road charging scheme |first=Matthew |last=Tempest |work=The Guardian |publisher=Guardian News and Media |date=2006-08-07 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Smeed, |first=R.J. |year=1964 |title=Road pricing: the economic and technical possibilities |publisher=HMSO}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Experts' plan to cut traffic pressure |work=The Times |date=1964-06-11 |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref> It recommended a method of "car user restraint" by a variable system of [[Road pricing|charging]] for road usage - if the government had the will to do so. During the early years of the [[Greater London Council]] the first plans were drawn up for a system of cordon charging or supplementary licensing for use in the central area. A formal study was undertaken into the merits of the scheme, and in 1973 concluded that it would improve traffic and environmental conditions in the centre.<ref name=bannister>{{cite book | title = Transport Planning | last = Bannister | first = David | year=2002 }}</ref> However, the newly elected [[Labour Party (UK)|Labour]] council rejected the study's findings in favour of greater investment in [[public transport]]. In 1995, the London Congestion Research Programme concluded that the city's economy would benefit from a congestion charge scheme,<ref>{{cite book |title=The London Congestion Research Programme | year=1995 |publisher=HMSO | isbn=0-11-551755-3 |author=[[Her Majesty's Stationery Office]]}}</ref> and the [[Road Traffic Reduction Act 1997]] required local authorities to study and reduce traffic volumes.<ref>{{cite web |title=Road Traffic Reduction Act 1997 Chapter 54| year=1997 |publisher=HMSO |author=[[Her Majesty's Stationery Office]] |url=http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1997/ukpga_19970054_en_1}}</ref>
The power to introduce "Road user charging" was given to any future mayor in the [[Greater London Authority Act 1999]].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/uk_politics/2000/london_mayor/534814.stm |title=What does the mayor get to do? |date=2000-05-16 |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref> [[Ken Livingstone]] had proposed in his manifesto to introduce a £5 charge for vehicles entering Central London.<ref name="guardian20060807">{{cite news |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/mayor/Story/0,2763,212441,00.html |title=Blair accuses Livingstone of £5 car toll |work=The Guardian |publisher=Guardian News and Media |date=2006-08-07 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref> Following his victory, the Mayor made a draft order and requested a report from TfL, which summarised the reasons for introducing the scheme.<ref name="tflprereport">{{cite web |title=Report to the Mayor of London |work=The Greater London (Central Zone): Congestion Charging Order 2001 |date=February 2002 |publisher=Transport for London |url=http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/Report_to_the_MayorcChapters_1-16.pdf |accessdate=2008-01-24 |format=PDF}}</ref> The scheme was to be introduced to reduce congestion in the centre of the capital following the ''Draft Transport Strategy'' of January 2001 which had highlighted the importance that the Mayor placed on tackling this issue.<ref name="tflprereport" /> The charge was to be part of a series of measures to improve the transport system in London and was to combined with public transport improvements, increased enforcement of parking and traffic regulations. The report stated that the scheme was expected to be the most effective in reducing through traffic, reducing congestion both within and outside the zone, improving the speed of buses and the quality of life in Central London.<ref name="tflprereport" /> It was stated that improved traffic flows would make London more attractive to business investment.<ref name="tflprereport" /> Substantial net revenues were anticipated, which were to be invested in London's transport system.<ref name="tflprereport" /> It also states that 90% of those who responded to a [[Public consultation|consultation]] on the scheme, viewed reducing traffic congestion in central London as 'important'. <ref name="tflprereport" />
Having won the first mayoral election in 2000, [[Ken Livingstone]] opted to exercise these powers as promised in his independent manifesto,<ref name="bbcannounce">{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1431419.stm |title=Drivers face £5 London toll |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2001-10-07 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref> and carried out a series of consultations with interested parties with the basic scheme agreed in February 2002.
===Congestion charges in other UK cities===
In October 2002, [[England]]'s first congestion charging scheme was introduced in [[Durham congestion charge|Durham]], it was restricted to a single road in that city, with a £2 charge.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wear/4893106.stm |title=Toll road lawyers in award hope |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2006-04-09 |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2288875.stm |title=Drivers charged to cut congestion |date=2002-10-01 |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref>
In November 2003, [[Secretary of State for Transport]] [[Alistair Darling]] said that despite apparent initial interest from many city councils, including those of [[Leeds]], [[Cardiff]], [[Manchester]], [[Birmingham]] and [[Bristol]], no city apart from [[Edinburgh]] had yet approached the Government for assistance in introducing a charge.<ref name="guardnov2003">{{cite news |title=Congestion charge fails to catch on |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1095611,00.html |first=Matthew |last=Tempest |date=2003-11-28 |work=Guardian Unlimited |publisher=Guardian News and Media Limited Friday November 28, 2003 |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref> [[Edinburgh City Council]] proposed a congestion zone, but this was rejected in a [[Edinburgh congestion charge|postal referendum]] by around 75% of voters in Edinburgh.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4287145.stm |title=Edinburgh rejects congestion plan |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2005-02-22 |accessdate=2005-10-11}}</ref> Unlike in London, where Ken Livingstone had sufficient [[devolved government|devolved]] powers to introduce the charge on his own authority, other cities would require the confirmation of the Secretary of State for Transport.<ref name="guardnov2003" /> Manchester has proposed a peak time [[Manchester Congestion Charge|congestion charge]] scheme which could be implemented in 2011/2012.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/manchester/content/articles/2007/01/24/240106_road_pricing_feature.shtml |title=Congestion charging: FAQs |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |work=BBC Manchester |date=2007-01-25 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/6691683.stm |title=City congestion fee plan unveiled |date=2007-05-25 |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref> Plans for similar charges in both the [[West Midlands (county)|West Midlands]] and [[East Midlands]] have been rejected.<ref>{{cite news |title=Road pricing proposals rejected |date=[[2008-03-05]] |publisher=BBC News |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/7278713.stm |accessdate=2008-05-18}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Congestion charge sunk by council |date=[[2008-05-09]] |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/nottinghamshire/7393145.stm |publisher=BBC work=BBC News |accessdate=2008-05-18}}</ref> The [[UK government|government]] has proposed a nation wide scheme of road tolls, but public opposition has been fierce and included a petition of nearly 2 million signatories on the [[10 Downing Street]] website.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6678915.stm |title=Push towards pay-as-you-go roads |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2007-05-22 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref> In an article in the Sunday Times in December 2007, the author describes how he believes that the failure of the London scheme, in terms of value for money, could undermine the Government's desire to convince other parts of the UK to introduce similar schemes.<ref name="st20071209">{{cite news |title=British cities shun London’s wasteful car tax |first=Steven |last=Swinford |date=2007-12-09 |work=The Sunday Times |publisher=News International Limited |url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3022505.ece |accessdate=2008-01-28}}</ref>
===Congestion charges in other countries===
A few other cities around the world already use or have tried [[congestion pricing]] schemes, including [[Singapore Area Licensing Scheme|Singapore]] (the first scheme in the world, started in 1975, [[Electronic Road Pricing|upgraded]] in 1998),<ref>{{cite web |year=2004 |url=http://web.archive.org/web/20060619191308/http://www.cfit.gov.uk/congestioncharging/factsheets/world/ |title=Charging schemes around the world |author=UK Commission for Integrated Transport |accessdate=2007-07-22}}</ref>
[[Rome#Motor Traffic Limited Zone (ZTL)|Rome]],<ref>{{cite web |year=2007 |url=http://www.cfit.gov.uk/map/europe-italy-rome.htm |title=Road Charging Scheme: Motor Traffic Limited Zone System |author=UK Commission for Integrated Transport |accessdate=2007-11-27}}</ref>
[[Valletta]],<ref>{{cite web |year=2007 |url=http://www.cva.gov.mt/ |title=Valletta Controlled Vehicular Access (CVA) System |author=CVA Technology |accessdate=2007-07-07}}</ref>
and [[Stockholm congestion tax|Stockholm]].
Others have implemented a city centre charging zone as a road toll to pay for capital investment in transport infrastructure, including [[Oslo#Road|Oslo]], [[Trondheim]], and [[Bergen, Norway|Bergen]]. A proposal to implement [[congestion pricing]] in [[New York City]] was stalled in 2008, as the [[New York State Assembly]] decided not vote on it. Chances for the bill to return in the near future to the State Assembly are considered dim.<ref name="NYT0408">{{Cite web | url=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/08/nyregion/08congest.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5088&en=6327902f9d5026b0&ex=1365393600&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss |author= Nicholas Confessore |date=2008-04-08 | title=$8 Traffic Fee for Manhattan Gets Nowhere | pubisher = The New York Times | accessdate = 2008-04-08 | language = }}</ref> The [[New York congestion pricing]] charge was one component of New York City Mayor [[Michael Bloomberg]]'s 2007 plan to improve the city's future environmental [[sustainability]] while planning for population growth, entitled ''[[PlaNYC|PlaNYC 2030]]: A Greener, Greater New York''.<ref>[http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/home/home.shtml Website of PlaNYC 2030</ref>
==Effects==
The effects of the congestion charge have been controversial. Studies have been made of its effects on congestion, traffic levels, road safety, the use of public transport, the environment, and business activity matters. A report published by TfL in October 2004 stated that only seven of the 13 government aims for London transport would be met by 2010. The target on reducing congestion for [[Greater London]] overall will not be met, the report said.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/3958931.stm | title=Road toll 'fails to cut traffic' |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2004-10-27 |accessdate=2006-04-08}}</ref>
=== Immediate impact ===
On the first day 190,000 vehicles moved into or within the zone during charging hours, a decrease of around 25% on normal traffic levels, partly due to it also being the half-term school holiday.<ref name="bbc20030218" /> A report from the [[Bow Group]] stated that historically, London congestion is at its worst during the morning rush hour, and that the early days of congestion charging had little impact on that critical time, the main effect occurring after 11 am.<ref name="bow">{{cite paper |title=London Under Livingstone: An evaluation of Labour’s Mayor |author=Christopher Mahon, Alastair Sloan |publisher=[[Bow Group|The Bow Group]] | url = http://www.bowgroup.org/harriercollectionitems/LondonUnderLivingstoneFINALv2.pdf }}</ref> Just over 100,000 motorists paid the charge personally, 15–20,000 were fleet vehicles paying under fleet arrangements, and it was believed around 10,000 liable motorists did not pay the due charge.<ref name="bbc20030218">{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2776915.stm |title=10,000 chased for congestion fine |date=2003-02-18 |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref>
Initial suggestions that school holidays were responsible for part of the traffic drop during the first week of operation of the charge were confirmed when traffic rose again by 5% following the return to school at the beginning of the second week of the charge. Reports indicated that, over the first month or so of operation, traffic was consistently down at least 15% on pre-charge levels, with the second week seeing the reduction drop to 20%.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2809073.stm |title=Congestion charge survives school run |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2003-02-23 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref>
The [[AA Motoring Trust]] suggested that changes to the timing of traffic lights and the end of major [[road works]] had also impacted congestion.<ref name="bbc60603">{{cite web |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2967852.stm |title=Congestion charge cuts jams |date=2003-06-06 |accessdate=2007-11-23 |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation}}</ref>
On [[23 October]] [[2003]] TfL published a report reviewing the first six months of the charge. The report's main findings were that the average number of cars and delivery vehicles entering the central zone was 60,000 fewer than the previous year. Around 50–60% of this reduction was attributed to transfers to public transport, 20–30% to journeys avoiding the zone, 15-25% switching to car share, and the remainder to reduced number of journeys, more traveling outside the hours of operation, and increased use of motorbikes and bicycles. Journey times were found to have been reduced by 14%. Variation in journey time for a particular route repeated on many occasions also decreased. The report also claimed that although the charge was responsible for about 4,000 fewer people visiting the zone daily, that the charge was responsible for only a small fraction of the 7% drop in retail sales reported.<ref name="tfl6months">{{cite book |title=Congestion charging six months on |url=http://web.archive.org/web/20060515194436/http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/downloads/pdf/congestion-charging/cc-6monthson.pdf |format=PDF |accessdate=2006-04-08 |publisher=[[Transport for London]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2004/02/17/cncong17.xml |work=Daily Telegraph |publisher=Telegraph |title= Charge fails to stop roar of London traffic |first=Caroline |last=Muspratt |date=2004-02-16 |accessdate=2007-05-27}}</ref>
The report also stated that around 100,000 penalty fines were issued each month, of which about 2,000 were contested.<ref name="tfl6months" />
By comparison, an experimental short-term congestion charge in Stockholm saw an average 25% reduction in traffic numbers.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/politics_show/6424481.stm |title=Traffic solutions |work=The Politics Show |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2007-03-09 |accessdate=2007-05-06}}</ref>
=== Traffic changes ===
[[Image:481142 bd7544d2.jpg|thumb|Traffic congestion on the [[Brompton Road]] outside [[Harrods]] (part of the [[A4 road|A4]]). This road is part of the extended congestion charge zone.]]
A year before the congestion zone, TfL set up automatic traffic counters and augmented them with regular classified traffic counts at key locations, in order to monitor long term trends.<ref name="tfljune2007">{{cite web |url=http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/fifth-annual-impacts-monitoring-report-2007-07-07.pdf |format=PDF |title=Impacts Monitoring - Fifth Annual Report |publisher=[[Transport for London]] |date=June 2007 |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref> Their results are reviewed and reported annually.
A report by TfL in early 2007 indicated that there were 2.27 traffic delays per kilometre in the original charging zone. This compared with a figure of 2.3 before the introduction of the congestion charge. After the scheme was introduced they had measured an improvement in journey times of 0.7 minutes per km, or 30%. This improvement had decreased to 22% in 2006, and during 2006 congestion levels had increased so that the improvement, compared to the year before the scheme, was just 7%. TfL explained this as a result of changes to road priorities within the zone, delays caused by new pedestrian and road user safety schemes, and, most particularly, a doubling of road works in the latter half of 2006.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7109727.stm |title=Congestion charge 'not working' |date=2007-02-23 |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref>
(Utilities were encouraged to complete planned road works in the year proceeding the congestion charge, so it would appear that the first year of measurement used for later comparisons would also have been affected by streetworks to some extent.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/02/16/ncong16.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/02/16/ixhome.html |title=London congestion charge 'not working' |first=Paul |last=Marston |work=The Daily Telegraph |publisher=Telegraph News and Media Limited |date=2004-02-06 |accessdate=2007-11-24}}</ref><ref name="bbc20070711">{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6292930.stm |date=2007-07-11 |title=Road toll 'cut traffic by 70,000' |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |accessdate=2007-11-24}}</ref>)
TfL's report in June 2007 found that the level of traffic of all vehicle types entering the central Congestion Charge Zone was now consistently 16% lower in 2006 than the pre-charge levels in 2002.<ref name="tfljune2007" /> The [[conservative]] [[Bow Group]] noted that the main effect occurred after 11 am.<ref name="bow">{{cite paper |title=London Under Livingstone: An evaluation of Labour’s Mayor |author=Christopher Mahon, Alastair Sloan |publisher=[[Bow Group|The Bow Group]] |url=http://www.bowgroup.org/harriercollectionitems/LondonUnderLivingstoneFINALv2.pdf |format=PDF}}</ref><!-- The Bow Group report commented on Fig 2.2 from the TFL report (page22). Would be nice to have that graph here. -->
Breaking down that figure showed the number of chargeable vehicles entering the zone had reduced by 30% (primarily cars and minicabs, although vans and lorries had decreased by 13%), while there were overall increases in the numbers of taxis, buses, and especially bicycles. The daily profile of traffic flows had changed, with less traffic after 9:30 am and a peak immediately before and after the end of the charging period. The level of traffic entering the zone during the morning peak had not reduced as much as at other times.<ref name="tfljune2007" />
They had noted a small but pervasive long term trend of less traffic entering the zone, expected to be a result of people changing their location and lifestyle, perhaps influenced by the charge.
Once within the charging zone car and delivery traffic remained unchanged, suggesting that the journeys made by residents and businesses within the zone were broadly unaffected. Changes to the road network over the years has made direct comparisons difficult, but TfL suspect that certain routes used heavily by taxis and buses within the zone have seen substantially increased traffic.
On some of the boundary roads traffic numbers had increased slightly but congestion and delays were largely unchanged from 2002 levels.
Year on year, counts of inbound traffic approaching the zone had also seen a distinct and significant 5–7% decline in the number of chargeable vehicles, which was unexplained.<ref name="tfljune2007" />
The charge operates for under one third of the hours in a year and covers around two thirds of the central London traffic.<ref name="tfljune2007" /> In total 8% of traffic kilometres are affected by the scheme.<ref name="tfljune2007" /> TfL have extrapolated the trends in road speed in the congestion zone; they have suggested that speeds would have dropped from 17 km/h in 2003 to 11.5 km/h by 2006, had the scheme not been put in place.<ref name="tfljune2007" />
Following the introduction of the Western Extension, TfL stated that traffic had fallen around 10 to 15% in the extended zone.<ref name="bbc20070521">{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6676671.stm |title=Traders rally against charge zone |date=2007-05-21 |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |accessdate=2007-05-23}}</ref> The original zone is showing a 4% increase in congestion following expansion of the congestion charge and the introduction of extended to discounts to residents of the new zone and buffer zone.<ref name="bbc20070711" />
TfL assessed the increase in charges in 2005 to have had only a slight impact overall.<ref name="tfljune2007" />
Although it was suggested that the scheme should improve the speed of vehicles in the centre, the [[London Ambulance Service]] (LAS) anticipated increased volumes of traffic around the edge of the zone and an increase in demand within the zone, that might both adversely affect clinical outcomes.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.londonambulance.nhs.uk/publications/areport/LAS%20Annual%20Report%202001_02.pdf |title=Annual Report 2002-3 |format=PDF |publisher=London Ambulance Service |accessdate=2008-01-22}}</ref>
However, since then, survival rates for LAS' witnessed cardiac arrests have tripled across Greater London. LAS attributes these improvements to equipment availability and operational processes, such as the deployment of four-wheeled and two-wheeled rapid response units that can weave through congestion more quickly.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.londonambulance.nhs.uk/news/archive/pressreleases/pressreleases_2007/oct24_07.htm |title= Capital’s cardiac arrest survival rate more than trebles in five years |publisher=London Ambulance Service |date=2007-10-24 |accessdate=2008-01-22}}</ref>
This, and TfL's increase in the number central London traffic calming measures, would suggest that other much more significant factors have masked any congestion charge-related changes in outcome, either up or down. In addition, like some other essential services, LAS felt it necessary to divert about £¼M from their budget to pay congestion charge allowances for key staff affected by the charges during their journey to work.<ref>{{cite book |url=http://www.londonambulance.nhs.uk/ABOUTUS/trustboard/media/Trust%20Board%2030Sep03.pdf |title= Meeting of the Trust Board |publisher=London Ambulance Service NHS Trust |page=Table 18 |date=2003-09-30 |accessdate=2008-01-22|format=PDF}}</ref>
According to a November 2007 newspaper report, TfL data showed that after an initial improvement, that rush-hour congestion had become worse than it was before the congestion charge was introduced.<ref>{{cite news |title=Rush-hour is slower than before C-charge |first=Pippa |last=Crerar |date=2007-11-06 |work=The Evening Standard |url=http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23419705-details/Rush-hour+is+slower+than+before+C-charge/article.do |accessdate=2008-01-27}}</ref> In December 2007, another article contained a similar observation, that although after the first year the results were looking good, with traffic speeds up, that at the time of writing, traffic speeds and delays were virtually back to their February 2003 levels.<ref name="st20071209"/>
===Road safety===
TfL have estimated that the charge appeared to have a small impact on the number of road traffic accidents – but this was much less than the national and London trend towards fewer accidents. There were 2,598 personal injury [[road traffic accident]]s inside the zone in the year before the scheme. This fell by about 200 each year to 1,629 in 2005. TfL's statisticians have extrapolated an estimate that between 40 and 70 injuries have been avoided annually because of the charging zone, with most of the rest attributed to the changes that altered and slowed down the road network "in favour of the people-moving capacity of the network."<ref name="tfljune2006">{{cite web |url=http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/FourthAnnualReportFinal.pdf |title=Impacts monitoring - Fourth Annual Report |format=PDF |publisher=[[Transport for London]] |accessdate=2008-02-11 |date=June 2006}}</ref>
TfL expects that many of these road safety interventions would have occurred irrespective of the introduction of congestion charging. Cars and motorcycles have seen the biggest reduction in accidents, whereas bicyclists have seen a slight increase, which perhaps reflects their increased numbers. For comparison, the inner ring road also saw a substantial drop as accidents fell from 961 to 632, which was slightly less than the average for Greater London.<ref name="tfljune2007" />
===Number plate cloning===
Another effect of the scheme, which relies on the recognition of vehicle [[British car number plates|number plates]] to enforce the charge, is that it has led to an increase in the number of cars carrying false number plates.<ref name="i20030326"/><ref name="wsj20030226"/> Fines for non-payment of the charge are sent to the [[Vehicle register|registered keeper]] of the number plate, without first checking whether the vehicle to which the plate belongs was actually the offending vehicle, the onus being placed on the keeper to prove their innocence.<ref>{{cite news
|title=Driver fights 'congestion' fine
|date=[[2003-04-28]]
|publisher=BBC
|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/2981877.stm
|accessdate=2008-02-15
}}</ref><ref>{{cite news
|title=Car clone victim turns detective
|date=[[2003-04-28]]
|publisher=BBC
|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/2983527.stm
|accessdate=2008-02-15
}}</ref><ref>{{cite news
|title=Woman in cloned number plates row
|date=[[2003-07-11]]
|publisher=BBC
|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/lancashire/3057347.stm
|accessdate=2008-02-15
}}</ref><ref>{{cite news
|title=Congestion fine shock for carer
|date=[[2003-11-25]]
|publisher=BBC
|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/3238342.stm
|accessdate=2008-02-15
}}</ref> [[Scrap yard|Car breaker]]s are amongst those being targeted as a source for number plates to be illegally used on other vehicles.<ref name="bbc20040624"/> The BBC reported in October 2005 that the [[AA Motoring Trust]] estimated that 1 in 250 cars entering the charging zone were displaying false plates.<ref>{{cite news
|title=Number plate theft 'on the rise'
|author=
|date=[[2005-10-14]]
|publisher=BBC
|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4340720.stm
|accessdate=2008-02-15
}}</ref> In 2006 police estimated that more than 40,000 number plate sets were stolen.<ref>{{cite news
|title=Call for car number plate revamp
|date=[[2007-06-02]]
|publisher=BBC
|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6707367.stm
|accessdate=2008-02-15
}}</ref>
===Public transport===
On the launch date of the original zone, an extra 300 buses (out of a total of around 20,000) were introduced.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2774271.stm |title=First congestion fines to go out |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2003-02-18 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref>
Bus and [[London Underground]] managers reported that buses and tubes were little, if at all, busier than normal.<ref name="bbc20030218" /> Usage of the [[London Underground]] has increased by 1% above pre-charge levels, having fallen substantially in 2003/2004, whilst bus patronage in the [[Central London]] area (not the same at the Congestion Charge Zone) had stabilised at 116,000 journeys per day after increasing from under 90,000 pre-charge. No change in [[National Rail]] patronage had been noted as a result of the introduction of the central zone charge.<ref name="tfljune2007" />
Since the introduction of the western extension, TfL has made a number of bus route changes to take advantage of the presumed higher traffic speeds and the greater demand for public transport. One new route ([[London Buses route 452|route 452]]) has been introduced and three others (routes [[London Buses route 31|31]], [[London Buses route 46|46]] and [[London Buses route 430|430]]) have been extended. In addition, the frequency of buses on other routes through the zone extension has been increased.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2007/02/19/congestion_bus_routes_feature.shtml |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |work=BBC London |accessdate=2007-05-26 |title=Buses increased after congestion extension}}</ref>
===Business===
Reports have shops and businesses being heavily affected by the cost of the charge, both in terms of lost sales and increased delivery costs as recognised by the London Chamber of Commerce.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2004/04/22/cncong22.xml |publisher=Telegraph Media Group Ltd |work=[[Daily Telegraph]] |title=Congestion charge cost £300m, say Oxford St traders |first=Caroline |last=Muspratt |date=2004-04-21 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref>[[Image:Broadgate aerial 1.jpg|thumb|left|tower|upright|The [[City of London]] is covered by the congestion charge.]] In August 2003, the [[John Lewis Partnership]] announced that in the first six months of the charge's operation, sales at their [[Oxford Street]] store fell by 7.3% whilst sales at other stores in the Greater London area but outside the Congestion Charge Zone rose by 1.7%.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2003/sep/05/londonpolitics.greaterlondonauthority |accessdate=2008-01-05 |title=Store chief hits at congestion charge |first=Rebecca |last=Allison |date=2003-09-05 |work=The Guardian |publisher=Guardian News and Media}}</ref> To partly compensate for the loss of revenue they extended opening hours and introduced regular [[Sunday shopping|Sunday opening]] for the first time.<ref>{{cite web| title = Damaging rise in congestion charge not justified, says West End store| first = Roger | last = Blitz | date = 2005-07-05 | url=http://search.ft.com/nonFtArticle?id=050705000870 | work = Financial Times |accessdate=2007-12-25}}</ref>
However London First's own report indicated that business was broadly supportive.<ref>{{cite news |title=Jury out on congestion charging |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3491453.stm |date=2004-02-16 |publisher= BBC News |accessdate=2007-05-28}}</ref> Subsequently another report stated that there had been a reduction in some employment in the charging zone.<ref name="layoffs">{{cite news |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2003/nov/25/transportintheuk.greaterlondonauthority |title=C-charge 'leads to layoffs' |first=Andrew |last=Clark |date=2003-11-25 |work=The Guardian |publisher=Guardian News and Media |accessdate=2008-01-06}}</ref> TfL criticised the reports as unrepresentative and that its own statistics reported no effect on business.<ref name="layoffs" />
A report in May 2005 stated that the number of shoppers had declined by 7% year-on-year in March, 8% in April and 11% in the first two weeks of May. TfL countered that an [[economic downturn]], the [[Progress of the SARS outbreak|SARS outbreak]] and threat of [[terrorism]] were likely factors. At the same time a [[London Chamber of Commerce]] report indicated that 25% of businesses were planning on relocation following the charges introduction.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-5007517-details/Congestion+charge+hammers+shops/article.do |title=Congestion charge hammers shops |first=Richard |last=Allen |work=Evening Standard |publisher=Associated Newspapers |date=2003-05-27 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref> However an independent report six months after the charge was implemented suggested that businesses were then supporting the charge. London First commissioned the study which reported that 49% of businesses felt the scheme was working and only 16% that it was failing.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2003/aug/18/londonpolitics.greaterlondonauthority |title=Business backs congestion charge |date=2003-08-13 |first=Andrew |last=Clark |accessdate=2007-05-26 |publisher=Guardian News and Media |work=The Guardian}}</ref> The Fourth Annual Review by TfL in 2004 indicated that business activity within the charge zone had been higher in both [[productivity]] and [[profitability]] and that the charge had a "broadly neutral impact" on the London wide [[economy]].<ref name="tfljune2006" /> The Fifth Annual Review continued to show the central congestion zone outperforming the wider London economy.<ref name="tfljune2007" />
It had been estimated that due to the West London extension in February 2007, 6,000 people would eventually lose their jobs.<ref>{{cite web |title= Congestion charge: Green lobby hails road-toll extension |url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/congestion-charge-green-lobby-hails-roadtoll-extension-437070.html |first=Barrie |last=Clement |date=2007-02-20 |accessdate=2004-05-26 |work=The Independent |publisher=Independent News and Media Ltd}}</ref> In May 2007, a survey of 150 local businesses stated they had seen an average drop in business of 25% following the introduction of the charge, which was disputed by TfL which stated that there had been "no overall effect" on business and that it had outperformed the rest of the UK in the central zone during 2006.<ref name="bbc20070521" />
===Environment===
[[Image:Petrol use urban density.svg|thumb|Major cities - per capita petrol use vs. population density<ref>Newman & Kenworth 1989, Andrew White Associates, DETR</ref>]]
Surface transport accounts for 22% of London's CO<sub>2</sub> emissions.<ref name="stuff20070912">{{cite news |url=http://www.stuff.co.nz/westcoast/4199401a14595.html |title=London resets its priorities |first=Dave |last=Moore |work=The Press |publisher=Fairfax Media |date=2007-09-12 |accessdate=2008-01-20}}</ref> The reduction of airbone emissions wasn't listed as one of the reasons for introducing the congestion charge. The pre-commencement report from TfL noted that the scheme wasn't expected to significantly affect [[air quality]], but that offering a discount to encourage the use of greener fuels would be a positive measure.<ref name="tflprereport" /> However, TfL has reported changes in air quality within and alongside the [[Inner Ring Road]] boundary of the zone. Levels of two [[greenhouse gas]]es fell, [[nitrous oxide]] (N<sub>2</sub>O), by 13.4% between 2002 & 2003, and [[carbon dioxide]] (CO<sub>2</sub>), as well as [[Particulate Matter|particulates]] (PM10).<ref name="tfljune2006" /> In 2007, the ''Fifth Annual Monitoring Report'' by TfL stated that between 2003 and 2006, N<sub>2</sub>O emissions fell by 17%, PM10 by 24% and CO<sub>2</sub> by 3%, with some being attributed to the effects of reduced levels of traffic flowing better, with the majority being as a result of improved vehicle technology.<ref name="tfljune2007" /><ref name="glareport">{{cite web |url=http://www.airquality.co.uk/archive/reports/cat09/0505171128_London_Congestion_Charge_Detailed_Assessment.doc |first=Lucy |last=Sadler |title=Detailed assessment London congestion charging |format=DOC |accessdate=2008-01-20 |publisher=UK Air Quality Archive}}</ref> In total, the rate of fall in CO<sub>2</sub> has been 20%.<ref>{{cite news |title=Milan introduces traffic charge |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7167992.stm |publisher=BBC News |date=2008-01-02 |accessdate=2008-01-20}}</ref> The TfL report makes it clear that only a one-off reduction of emissions could be expected from the introduction of the charge, whilst further reductions are unlikely to be as a result of the charge.<ref name="tfljune2007" />
{| class="wikitable"
|-
|
| colspan="3" | Charging zone
| colspan="3" | Inner Ring Road
|-
|
| N<sub>2</sub>O
| PM10
| CO<sub>2</sub>
| N<sub>2</sub>O
| PM10
| CO<sub>2</sub>
|-
| Overall traffic emissions change 2003 versus 2002<ref name="tfljune2006" />
| -13.4
| -15.5
| -16.4
| -6.9
| -6.8
| -5.4
|-
| Overall traffic emissions change 2004 versus 2003<ref name="tfljune2006" />
| -5.2
| -6.9
| -0.9
| -5.6
| -6.3
| -0.8
|-
| Changes due to improved vehicle technology<ref name="tfljune2007" />
| -17.3
| -23.8
| -3.4
| -17.5
| -20.9
| -2.4
|-
| colspan="7" style="text-align:center;font-size:90%;"|<small>Source: [http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/FourthAnnualReportFinal.pdf Transport for London] 2003–2004 figures are TfL estimates. </small>
|}
National trends had already shown a rapid decline of some other emissions during the late 1990s, notably [[carbon monoxide]], and levels have been relatively stable since 2002 across London. Since 2002, the [[nitrogen dioxide]] (NO<sub>2</sub>) produced by diesel exhaust has become a serious problem, with the [[London Air Quality Network]] of [[King's College London]] reporting that the annual mean NO<sub>2</sub> objective (of 40 μgm-3 or 21 ppb) was exceeded at all kerbside and roadside monitoring sites across central and greater London during 12 months between 2005 and 2006. Although no areas within the Congestion Charge Zone reported NO<sub>2</sub> levels above an upper limit of 200 μgm-3 (105 ppb), some monitoring areas near the zone boundary experienced very long periods at such levels, notably the [[A23 road|A23]] near Brixton (3741 hours) and the [[Marylebone Road]] (849 hours).<ref name=laqn>{{cite web |format=PDF |url=http://www.londonair.org.uk/london/reports/AirQualityInLondon2005andmid2006.pdf |title=Air Quality In London 2005 and mid 2006 – Briefing |last=Fuller & Green |date=2006-07-28 |publisher=London Air Quality Network |accessdate=2008-01-08}}</ref> TfL report that emissions may not necessarily feed through into improvements in air quality and that vehicle emissions are only one contributor to total emissions of a particular pollutant along with weather conditions and industrial use.<ref name="tfljune2007" /> It was also reported that pollutant concentrations were being affected by the change in the make up of the vehicle fleet.<ref name="tfljune2007" /> Preliminary reports also indicate the rate of decline in certain pollutants is decreasing.<ref name="tfljune2007" /> Further studies are being undertaken into the air quality effects.<ref name="tfljune2007" />
===Outer London===
The charge has proved controversial in the outer areas of London, where it has encouraged commuters who previously drove into central London to instead park at suburban railway or underground stations. This has been accompanied by the introduction of extra on-street parking restrictions and controlled parking zones in these areas, at the expense of local residents.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2003/mar/17/transportintheuk.greaterlondonauthority |title=Road and rail promises leave commuters unmoved |first=Andrew |last=Clark |date=2003-03-17 |work=The Guardian |publisher=Guardian News and Media |accessdate=2008-01-06}}</ref>
==Income and costs==
TfL's annual report for 2006–7 shows that revenues from the congestion charge were £252.4m over the financial year, representing 8.5% of TfL's annual revenues. More than half of this was spent on the cost of running the toll system, at £130.1 million. Once other charges were deducted, the congestion charge brought in an annual operating [[net income]] of £89.1m for TfL.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/corporate/annual-report-and-statement-of-accounts-06-07.pdf |format=PDF |title=Annual Report and Statement of Accounts 2006/07
|date=April 2007 |author=[[Transport for London]] |publisher=[[Mayor of London]] |page=Note 26 |accessdate=2007-11-25}}</ref>
(This income compares with TfL's total revenue from bus and tube fares of £2,269.4m, or 76.6% of revenue before costs, or grants from central government of £2,390.3 million.)
By law, all surpluses raised must be reinvested into London's transport infrastructure; at the start of the scheme it was anticipated that this would be around £200 million.<ref name="bbcrev">{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2006/11/21/congestion_update_feature.shtml |title=Where has the money gone? |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |work=BBC London |date=2007-02-19 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref><ref name="bbcannounce" /> According to a report issued in February 2007, the initial costs of setting up the scheme were £161.7 million,<ref name="bbcrev" /> with an annual operating cost of about £115m anticipated.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cbi.org.uk/ndbs/Regions.nsf/802737AED3E3420580256706005390AE/E98F7054FD93A6CF80256CCA005B7F58 |publisher=Confederation of British Industry |title=Congestion charging |accessdate=2006-08-20}}</ref>
Total revenues over the first three and a half years had been £677.4 million, with TfL reporting a surplus over operating costs of £189.7 million.<ref name="bbcrev" />
The initial operating revenues from the congestion charge did not reach the levels that were originally expected. Within six months of the start of the scheme, the reduction in traffic had been such that TfL were predicting a £65 million revenue shortfall.<ref name="bbc20030612">{{cite news |title=Congestion charge leads to budget shortfall |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/2985554.stm |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2003-06-12 |accessdate=2008-01-06}}</ref>
The June 2005 increase in charges by 60% only resulted in a relatively small rise in revenues, as there were fewer penalty payments.
The anticipated start up costs of the Western extension were £125 million with operating costs of £33m; expected [[gross revenue]]s were expected to be £80 million resulting in [[net revenue]]s of £50 million.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://web.archive.org/web/20070630150201/http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/corporate/wez_EconomicIA.pdf |format=PDF |title=Congestion Charging: Proposed Western Extension Public Consultation Economic and Business Impact Assessment |date=April 2005 |author=[[Transport for London]] with GLA Economics |publisher=[[Transport for London]] |page=Pages 9 & 10 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref>
{| class="wikitable"
|+Provisional TfL figures, rounded to the nearest £1m, apparently using a different basis from the audited TfL accounts summarised above
|
! colspan="3" | Revenues (£m) provisional
|-
|
|2004/5<ref name=tfljune2005>{{cite web |url=http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/ThirdAnnualReportFinal.pdf |title=Impacts Monitoring - Third Annual Report |date=April 2005 |publisher=[[Transport for London]] |format=PDF |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref>
|2005/6<ref name="tfljune2006" />
|2006/7<ref name="tfljune2007" />
|-
|Standard daily vehicle charges (currently £8)
|98
|121
|125
|-
|Fleet vehicle daily charges (currently £7)
|17
|19
|27
|-
|Resident vehicles (currently £4 per week)
|2
|2
|6
|-
|Enforcement income
|72
|65
|55
|-
|Other income
|
|2
|
|-
|Total revenues
|190
|210
|213
|-
|Total operation and administration costs
|(92)
|(88)
|(90)
|-
|Net revenues
|97
|122
|123
|}
{|class="wikitable"
|+Table from a report from the [[Bow Group]], compiled from TfL data, which also includes capital costs<ref name="bow"/>
|
!colspan="7"|Figures £m
|-
|
|2001/2||2002/3||2003/4||2004/5||2005/6||2006/7||Total
|-
|Revenue
| ||18.5||186.7||218.1||254.1||252.4||929.8
|-
|Operating costs
| || || || || || ||
|-
|Toll facilities
| ||58.2||120.9||120.8||143.5||130.1||573.5
|-
|Traffic management
| ||4.2||2||0.6||0.4||0.3||7.5
|-
|Other
|4||14.4||18.5||0.3||3.9||32.9||74
|-
|Net operating income
|(4)||(58)||45.3||96.4||106.3||89||275
|-
|Capital costs
| ||(162)|| || || ||(103)||(265)
|-
|Cumulative profit
|colspan=6| ||10.0
|}
{| class="wikitable"
|
! colspan="2" | Expenditure (% of operating revenue)
|-
|
|2004/5<ref name=tfljune2005 />
|2006/7<ref name="tfljune2007" />
|-
|Bus network improvements (incl. vehicles, garages & shelters)
|80%
|82%
|-
|Road safety (incl. research & campaigns)
|11%
|4%
|-
|"Safer routes to schools" initiative
|2%
|
|-
|Walking & cycling programmes & publicity
|6%
|2.5%
|-
|Distribution and freight (incl. review of a London lorry ban)
|1%
|
|-
|Road and bridge maintenance & upgrades
|
|11%
|-
|}
Although Parliament has limited the amount that authorities can borrow, for some time it had been speculated that the regular income obtained from the congestion charge and other revenues could be used to [[Securitization|securitise]] a [[bond issue]] that finances other transport projects across London.<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.newstatesman.com/200004100065 | title = Rocky road to a smoother journey | work = New Statesman | first = Stephen | last = Glaister | date = 2000-04-10 | accessdate=2007-12-25}}</ref> TfL issued their first bond for £200 million in 2005, to be repaid at 5% interest over 30 years. TfL plans to borrow £3.1 billion more to fund a 5-year transport programme across London, including works on London Underground and road safety schemes.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/businessandpartners/stakeholderjan05v4.pdf |title=Newsletter Issue 8 |date=Spring 2005 |publisher=[[Transport for London]] |format=PDF |accessdate=2007-12-25}}</ref>
==Political reaction==
Before the charge's introduction, there were fears of a very chaotic few days as the charge bedded down. Indeed [[Ken Livingstone]], [[Mayor of London]] and key proponent of the charge, himself predicted a "difficult few days"<ref name="indfirst">{{cite news |first=Matthew |last=Beard |url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/livingstone-predicts-difficult-few-days-as-congestion-charge-begins-597903.html |title=Livingstone predicts 'difficult few days' as congestion charge begins |work=The Independent |publisher=Independent News and Media Limited |date=2003-02-17 |accessdate=2006-04-09}}</ref> and a "bloody day".<ref name="bbcfirstday">{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2772583.stm |title=Congestion charge cuts traffic levels |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2003-02-18 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref>
In July 2002, [[City of Westminster|Westminster Council]] launched a legal challenge against the plans, arguing that they would increase pollution and were a breach of [[human rights]] of residents on the boundary of the zone.<ref name="bbc20020715">{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2128482.stm |title=Congestion charges face legal challenge |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2002-07-15 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref> The [[High Court of Justice|High Court]] rejected the claim.<ref name="scotsman20020801">{{cite news |url=http://news.scotsman.com/roadtolls/Livingstone-wins-road-toll-battle.2348398.jp |title=Livingstone wins road toll battle |first=Alison |last=Hardie |work=The Scotsman |publisher=Johnston Press plc |date=2002-08-01 |accessdate=2008-01-06}}</ref> On introduction, the scheme was the largest ever undertaken by a [[capital|capital city]].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2770721.stm |title=Smooth start for congestion charge |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2003-02-18 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref>
[[Steven Norris]], the [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative Party]] candidate for mayor in 2004, has been a fierce critic of the charge, branding it the 'Kengestion' charge. A few days before the scheme came into operation, he wrote in a BBC report that it had been "shambolically organised", that the [[public transport]] network had insufficient spare capacity to cater for travellers deterred from using their cars in the area by the charge. Further, he said that the scheme would affect poorer sections of society more than the rich, with the daily charge being the same for all, regardless of vehicle size.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2752211.stm |first=Steve |last=Norris |title=Why Ken's charge will do damage for years to come |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2003-02-12 |accessdate=2007-05-27
}}</ref>
He pledged to scrap it if he became mayor in June 2004. He had also pledged that, if elected, he would grant an amnesty to anyone with an outstanding fine for non-payment of the charge on [[11 June]] [[2004]]. In an interview with London's ''[[Evening Standard]]'' newspaper on [[5 February]] [[2004]], Conservative leader [[Michael Howard]] backed his candidate's view by saying that the charge] has undoubtedly had a damaging effect on business in London."<ref>{{cite news |first=Joe |last=Murphy |url=http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-8990408-details/Howard%3A+C-charge+damages+business/article.do;jsessionid=MZ2vHQbCLrTT51KtYnyFvq8t5xJwyklhx1Q1clQ1LLJnNSy8VHqs!1365716654!-1407319225!7001!-1 |title=Howard: C-charge damages business |work=Evening Standard |publisher=Associated Newspapers Limited |date=2004-02-05 |accessdate=2007-01-06}}</ref> [[Liberal Democrats|Liberal Democrat]] candidate, [[Simon Hughes]], however, supported the basic principles of the scheme. Amongst some of the changes he proposed were changing the end time from 6:30 pm to 5 pm and automatically giving all vehicles five free days each year so as not to affect occasional visitors.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3542235.stm |title=Hughes will stop road toll at 5 pm |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2004-03-08 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref>
In 2005, the [[Liberal Democrats]] claimed that Capita had been fined £4.5 million for missing the targets set for the congestion charge, that was equivalent to £7,400 for every day that the charge had existed.<ref>{{cite web |title=Capita fined £4.5 million for missing C-Charge targets |date=2005-03-08 |publisher=Liberal Democrats |url=http://www.glalibdems.org.uk/news/000263/capita_fined_45million_for_missing_ccharge_targets.html}}</ref> The ''London Assembly Budget Committee'' 2003 report on the company criticised the contract with Capita as not providing value for money.<ref>{{cite paper
|title=Public Interest, Private Profit: Transport for London’s Contract with Capita for the Congestion Charging Scheme |format=RTF |date=October 2003 |publisher=London Assembly Budget Committee |url=http://mayor.london.gov.uk/assembly/reports/budget/capita.rtf |quote=We dispute the Mayor’s frequently made claim that TfL’s contract with Capita represents ‘best value’ for Londoners. It has not proved to be a good deal for taxpayers |accessdate=2008-01-22}}</ref> It was reported in July 2003 that TfL agreed to subsidise Capita by paying it £31 million because it was making no profits from the project, and that the most critical problem was the 103,000 outstanding penalty notices not paid.<ref>{{cite web |title=Capita making no profits from London congestion charge scheme - report |date=2003-07-31 |work=Interactive Investor |publisher=Interactive Investor Trading Limited |url=http://www.iii.co.uk/shares/?type=news&articleid=4711002&action=article |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref> Capita was also the company that won the 'Most Invasive Company' award in the [[Privacy International]] 2003 Big Brother Awards.<ref>{{cite news |title=Mayor Ken named Big Bad Brother |date=2003-03-25 |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2882317.stm |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref>
[[Image:CCTV CC London Pimlico.JPG|thumb|Congestion charge CCTV cameras on Vauxhall Bridge Road]]
The congestion charge remained an issue during the run up to the [[London mayoral election, 2008|2008 mayoral election]]. [[Boris Johnson]], the [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative Party]] candidate suggested looking at a graduated charging scheme and proposed further consultation on whether to remove parts of the Congestion Charge Scheme. He also said that he would not introduce the emissions based charging system which was due to be introduced in October 2008<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23421570-details/Boris+backs+small+shops+campaign/article.do |publisher=Associated Newspapers Limited |work=Evening Standard |title=Boris backs small shops campaign |first=Pippa |last=Crerar |date=2007-11-16 |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref>
[[Brian Paddick]], the [[Liberal Democrats|Liberal Democrat]] candidate, suggested exempting [[Delivery (commerce)|delivery]] vehicles from the charge.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/17/npaddick117.xml&page=1 |work=The Daily Telegraph |publisher=Telegraph Media Group Limited ||title=Brian Paddick: 'Why I want to be mayor' |authors=Rachel Sylvester and Alice Thomson |date=2007-11-18 |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/13/nlibdem113.xml |title=Brian Paddick is Lib Dem London candidate |work=The Daily Telegraph |publisher=Telegraph Media Group Limited |first=Brendan |last=Carlin |date=2007-11-14 |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref>
The successful mayoral candidate newly [[Boris Johnson]] announced <ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7494495.stm| title=Mayor quashes £25 C-charge hike |publisher=BBC News |date=2008-07-08|accessdate=2008-07-08|language= }}</ref> on [[8 July]] [[2008]] that his predecessor [[Ken Livingstone]]'s plan to introduce a £25 charge for the heavy-polluting vehicles will not go ahead.
==Further proposals==
After the introduction of the charge, there were a number of suggestions for its future. Soon after charging commenced, Livingstone announced that he would carry out a formal review of the charge's success or failure six months after its introduction – brought forward from one year, following the smooth start. On [[25 February]] [[2003]] Livingstone stated, "I can't conceive of any circumstances in the foreseeable future where we would want to change the charge, although perhaps ten years down the line it may be necessary" referring to the amount that drivers have to pay, indicating that £5 was sufficient to bring about the reduction in traffic that he had hoped for.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/2797177.stm |title='No increase' in congestion charge |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2003-02-25 |accessdate=2006-04-08}}</ref> By November 2004, Livingstone directly contradicted his earlier stance and said in an interview with BBC London, "I have always said that during this term [his second term in office] it will go up to at least £6."<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/3973157.stm |title=Road toll up by 'at least £1' |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2004-11-01 |accessdate=2006-04-08}}</ref> By the end of the month, Livingstone changed his position again, saying in an announcement that, in fact, the rise would be to £8 for private vehicles and £7 for commercial traffic. Business groups such as [[London First]] said following the announcement that the charges were "totally unsatisfactory and unacceptable".<ref>{{cite news |first=Roger |last=Blitz |url=http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5a399a64-4340-11d9-bea1-00000e2511c8.html |title=Congestion charge rise to £8 planned by London mayor |work=Financial Times |publisher=The Financial Times Ltd |date=2004-12-01 |accessdate=2006-04-08}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/4054711.stm |title=Congestion charge may rise to £8 |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2004-11-30 |accessdate=2006-04-08}}</ref> The rise to £8 was announced formally on [[1 April]] [[2005]], along with discounts for drivers buying month or year-long tickets.<ref>{{cite press release |publisher=[[Greater London Authority]] |date=2005-04-01 |title=Congestion charge to increase to £8; fleet and regular users to receive discounts |url=http://www.london.gov.uk/view_press_release.jsp?releaseid=4988 |accessdate=2005-11-25}}</ref><ref name="bbc20050401" /> On [[10 May]] [[2006]], in a live TV debate, Livingstone supported a rise in the charge to £10 by 2008.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4760185.stm |title=Anger at '£10 congestion charge' |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2006-05-11 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref>
===Western extension===
In February 2004, TfL issued a consultation document<ref name="tfl20040216>{{cite press release |url=http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/4375.aspx |title=Londoners views sought on c-charge western extension |date=2004-02-16 |publisher=[[Transport for London]] | accessdate=2008-01-06}}</ref> on the expansion of the zone to the west that would cover the rest (western portion) of Westminster and the [[Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea]]. The extension covered around 230,000 residents, compared with the 150,000 in the original zone.<ref name="westprotest">{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3779091.stm |title=Protest over congestion charging |date=2004-06-05 |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref>
- [[Image:Park Lane Road sign.jpg|thumb|left|[[Park Lane (road)|Park Lane]] is one of the new free through routes.]]
- In August 2004, following Livingstone's re-election in the [[London mayoral election, 2004|June 2004 mayoral election]], the results of the consultation were published. A substantial majority of respondents did not want the extension,<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4296968.stm |title= Congestion Charge Zone to expand |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2005-09-30 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref> however Livingstone said he was going ahead and that the consultation was a charade.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-135899600.html |title=C-charge consultation is charade, admits Ken |first=Katharine |last=Barney |work=Evening Standard |publisher=Associated Newspapers |date=2005-12-07 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref> Protests continued against the extension,<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4488363.stm |title=Go-slow protest over road charge |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2005-04-27 |accessdate=2007-11-24}}</ref> with residents arguing that only 5% of the road space in the selected area was congested.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6371553.stm |title=Leafy Kensington shows its anger |first=Finlo |last=Rohrer |date=2007-02-17 |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |accessdate=2007-11-23}}</ref> Following on in May 2005 TfL a further consultation began with specific proposals about the extensions. These included a plan to reduce the operating hours of the charge by half-an-hour to "boost trade at London's theatres, restaurants and cinemas".<ref>{{cite press release |publisher=[[Transport for London]] |title=Public Consultation on detail of proposed extension to congestion charging zone begins |url=http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/4052.aspx |date=2005-05-09 |accessdate=2007-05-28}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4529009.stm |title=Charge zone times could shorten |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2005-05-09 |accessdate=2005-10-11}}</ref>
- At the end of September 2005, London Mayor Ken Livingstone confirmed the western expansion of the congestion charge, to come into effect on [[19 February]] [[2007]] despite the majority of residents opposing it in the two consultations.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/congest/western-extension.jsp |title=Congestion Charging Western Extension | publisher = [[Greater London Authority]] |accessdate = 2006-04-08}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |first=Ben |last=Webster |url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1805811,00.html |title=Livingstone takes charge zone farther west despite opposition |work=[[The Times]] |publisher=News International Limited |date=2005-10-01 |accessdate=2006-04-09}}</ref> It was expected that the extension would increase congestion in the zone by around 5% as the 60,000 residents in the new zone will be entitled to the discounts available.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/capitals-congestion-charge-area-extended-437008.html |work=The Independent |publisher=Independent News and Media Limited |title=Capital's congestion charge area extended |first=Peter |last=Woodman |date=2007-02-19 |accessdate=2007-05-26}}</ref> Several roads were also to be left charge-free between the original zone and the extension.<ref name="bbcextfeature" />
===Tag and Beacon charging===
TfL ran a six month trial of [[Tag and Beacon]] from February 2006 to replace the camera based system. This uses an electronic card affixed to the [[windscreen]] of a vehicle and can be used to produce "smart tolls" where charges can be varied dependent on time and direction of travel. This system automatically deducts the charge so that the 50,000 drivers a year who forget to pay the fine would not be penalised. TfL has suggested that this scheme could be introduced from 2009.<ref>{{cite news |title=Electronic tags for cars as congestion charge spreads out |url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/article733481.ece |work=The Times |publisher=News International Ltd |date=2006-02-22 |fist=Ben |last=Webster |accessdate=2007-05-27}}</ref><ref name="wasted" />
===Blackwall Tunnel charging===
Transport for London consulted on a charge for the [[Blackwall Tunnel]] in [[East London, England|East London]], but these proposals have been put on hold following significant opposition from the public.<ref>{{cite news |title=77% reject A12 Blackwall Tunnel toll, says City Hall survey |url=http://www.eastlondonadvertiser.co.uk/content/towerhamlets/advertiser/news/story.aspx?brand=ELAOnline&category=news&tBrand=northlondon24&tCategory=newsela&itemid=WeED05%20Nov%202007%2013%3A57%3A08%3A843 |work=East London Advertiser |publisher=Archant Regional Limited |date=2007-11-05 |accessdate=2007-11-24}}</ref>Former Mayor Ken Livingstone has stated that he had "absolutely no plans to set up a congestion charging zone to charge vehicles that use the Blackwall Tunnel or the Blackwall Tunnel Approach Road. But if [[Greenwich]] wishes to do so on any of its roads then I will support them".<ref name=londoner>{{cite web |publisher=Greater London Authority |title=Letters |work=The Londoner |last=Livingstone |first=Ken |url=http://www.london.gov.uk/londoner/08jan/letters.jsp |date=2008-01-08 |accessdate=2008-02-02}}</ref>
===Emissions based fee structure===
A new emissions based fee sructure <ref>{{cite web
|title=CO2 Charge and CO2 Discount: February 2008
|publisher=Mayor of London
|url=http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/congest/index.jsp
|accessdate=2008-02-22
}}</ref>
had been proposed by the previous mayor, [[Ken Livingstone]]. The current mayor, [[Boris Johnson]], announced <ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7494495.stm| title=Mayor quashes £25 C-charge hike |publisher=BBC News |date=2008-07-08|accessdate=2008-07-08|language= }}</ref> on the 8th July 2008 that this new charging structure which was due to start in October 2008, will no longer happen.
The proposal was put forward the end of 2006 by [[Ken Livingstone]]; a variable [[London congestion charge|congestion charge]], based on the [[Vehicle Excise Duty]] (VED) bands would be introduced. This would reduce or eliminate the charge for ''Band A'' vehicles, and increase it to up to £25 a day for ''Band G'' vehicles, that is, CO<sub>2</sub> emissions of greater than 225 g/km. Consultation on these proposals began in August 2007.<ref>{{cite news |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |title=Polluting cars C-charge discussed |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6936470.stm |date=2007-08-10 |accessdate=2007-11-25}}</ref> According to a report commissioned by [[Land Rover]] by the [[Centre for Economics and Business Research]] [[think tank]], this scheme would increase pollution. Consultation ended on [[19 October]] [[2007]].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7050605.stm |title=Warning over pollution c-charge |work=BBC News |publisher=British Broadcasting Corporation |date=2007-10-18 |accessdate=2007-11-25}}</ref>
====Detail====
On [[2008-02-12]] TfL announced that on [[2008-10-27]] they would introduce a new charging structure for vehicles entering the congestion zone, based on potential CO<sub>2</sub> emission rates.<ref name="tfl_co2">{{cite web
|title=CO2 charging
|publisher=TfL
|url=http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/congestioncharging/7394.aspx
|accessdate=2008-02-22
}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
|title=Congestion Charging: CO2 Charge and CO2 Discount: February 2008
|publisher=Mayor of London
|url=http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/congest/co2charge-08feb.jsp
|accessdate=2008-02-22
}}</ref>
The main change would be the introduction of two new fees:
* £25 per day (with no residents' discount) for ''cars'' which, if first registered on or after [[2001-03-01]] are rated in Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) "Band G" (emitting above 225g/km of CO<sub>2</sub>), or if first registered before [[2001-03-01]] have an engine capacity of greater than 3000 [[Cubic centimetre|cc]] and for ''pickups'' with two rows of seats which either are rated as emitting above 225g/km of CO<sub>2</sub> or which have an engine capacity of greater than 3000 cc.<ref name="tfl_co2"/> It should be noted that in Alistair Darling's 2008 budget it was announced that VED Band G would be lowered to 151g/km of CO<sub>2</sub>. TfL have not yet clarified whether the £25 daily charge will be linked to the band when the changes take effect.
* £0 per day (a 100% discount) for cars that either are rated as emitting less than 120g/km CO<sub>2</sub> and which meet the [[Euro 4]] air pollution emissions standard or which are rated as emitting no more than 120g/km CO<sub>2</sub> and which appear on the PowerShift register.<ref name="tfl_co2"/>
====Controversy====
Acting director of the RAC Sheila Raingner stated that "The congestion charge was originally developed to reduce congestion. Changing this will confuse the public and reduce support and trust for future initiatives."<ref>{{cite web
|title=BBC NEWS | England | London | 'Gas guzzlers' C-charge up to £25
|publisher=BBC News
|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7240309.stm
}}</ref> The scheme has also been criticised by car manufacturer Porsche, who announced they intend to request a judicial review.<ref>{{cite web
|title=BBC NEWS | England | London | Porsche challenges C-charge rise
|publisher=BBC News
|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7252092.stm}}</ref> They claim the new charges are disproportionately high, and will not make a 'meaningful difference' to the environment. <ref>{{cite web|title=Porsche Judicial Review
|publisher=Porsche
|url=http://www.porschejudicialreview.co.uk/our_case.htm}}</ref>
At the request of Porsche, [[King's College London|King's College]] released the full report of the possible effects of the new system that was originally commissioned by [[Transport for London]]. This report indicated that the proposed new system would reduce CO2 emissions in central London by 2,200 tonnes by 2012, but would increase CO2 emissions by 182,000 tonnes in outer London, due to drivers of more polluting vehicles avoiding congestion charge zones. Upon the release of this report, a spokesman [[Transport for London]] stated that the methodology used by [[King's College London|King's]] was 'less robust and accurate than TfL's methodology'. They stated that their findings suggested reductions of up to 5000 tonnes of CO2 by 2009, and claimed that [[King's College London|King's College]] agreed with these results and are making revisions to their report<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7338606.stm 'C-charge hike 'will increase CO2''] BBC News </ref><ref>[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/04/10/cncharge110.xml 'Row over Congestion Charge pollution claims']</ref>
== See also ==
* [[Manchester congestion charge]]
* [[Durham City congestion charge]]
* [[Electronic toll collection]]
* [[Electronic Road Pricing|Singapore's Electronic Road Pricing]]
* [[Motoring taxation in the United Kingdom]]
* [[Road pricing]]
* [[Stockholm congestion tax]]
* [[Trondheim Toll Scheme]]
==References ==
{{reflist|2}}
== External links ==
{{portal|London}}
* [http://www.cclondon.com/ Transport for London's congestion charge homepage]
* [http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/travel/congestion/ BBC London's congestion charge page]
* [http://www.congestioncharginginfo.com/congestion_charge/ Telephone congestion charging information line]
{{TfL}}
{{featured article}}
[[Category:Electronic toll collection]]
[[Category:London words]]
[[Category:Fare collection systems in London]]
[[Category:Road transport in London]]
[[Category:Transport projects in London]]
[[Category:Motoring taxation in the United Kingdom]]
[[Category:2003 in London]]
[[Category:2003 establishments]]
[[Category:Town and country planning in England]]
[[Category:Roads in England]]
[[Category:Local taxation]]
[[Category:Sustainable transport]]
[[Category:Road congestion charge schemes in the United Kingdom]]
[[cs:London Congestion Charge]]
[[da:Londons myldretidsafgift]]
[[de:London Congestion Charge]]
[[es:Peaje urbano de Londres]]
[[fr:Péage urbain de Londres]]
[[ko:런던 혼잡통행료]]
[[it:London congestion charge]]
[[lv:Londonas satiksmes nodeva]]
[[hu:Londoni dugódíj]]
[[nl:London congestion charge]]
[[ja:コンジェスチョン・チャージ]]
[[no:Londons rushtrafikkavgift]]
[[pt:Portagem urbana de Londres]]
[[uk:Протизаторний збір в Лондоні]]