Nuxx:0b4645cc-aedc-42fa-a8fd-4ff112085539@75g2000hso.googlegroups.com

Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!75g2000hso.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <0b4645cc-aedc-42fa-a8fd-4ff112085539@75g2000hso.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling Subject: =?windows-1252?Q?TfL_=91lies=92_skew_the_vote_on_C=2Dcharge_extension_v?= =?windows-1252?Q?ote?= Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 08:17:54 -0700 (PDT) Lines: 183 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.105.255.206 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1222874275 1202 127.0.0.1 (1 Oct 2008 15:17:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 15:17:55 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: 75g2000hso.googlegroups.com; posting-host=88.105.255.206; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.2) Gecko/2008091620 Firefox/3.0.2,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 8602 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:669858

Once again, the trolls will show how anti-motorist they are by welcoming, rather than condemning, TfL's behaviour. Who do they think they're kidding? Seriously, who? No-one is fooled. It's sad that they're so deluded about that.

(By the way, I know the regulars on this group don't like reading true facts which may in some way expose or hinder their anti-motorist crusade; I apologise for posting some. Not.  If you don't like the truth then YOU are the one with the problem, and no amount of hypocritical nonsense about "trolls" will change that one bit.  You need to stop blaming other people for your deficiencies, and accept things for the way that they are.  Motorists aren't *that* bad, surely...why not take this opportunity to make your peace with them and find some other, less spiteful way of making a difference?)

Now then, onto TfL's lies. (An anti-motorist organisation lying? Fancy that. It's as if being anti-motorist and being a liar go hand in hand.)  Why are they trying to go against Boris when they're not allowed to have a political viewpoint? They should be doing exactly what Boris tells them, without

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23562465-details/TfL+%27lies= %27+skew+the+vote+on+C-charge+extension+vote/article.do

TfL =91lies=92 skew the vote on C-charge extension vote

TFL is making a string of false claims and using figures it should know to be untrue to boost its chances of keeping the controversial western extension of the congestion charge, a Standard investigation can reveal.

As a consultation on the extension's future enters its closing stages, the Standard has established that much of the key information given to those taking part is misleading or wrong.

TfL has also ignored or misrepresented damning evidence from its own research about the effects of the extension on business, emissions, local bus services, and congestion. It has overlooked a finding by its own researchers that "the rapidity of the deterioration in [traffic] conditions inside the western extension has been striking". In its main leaflet for the consultation it claims that the impact of the charge on the area's businesses has been "mixed" or "broadly neutral."

In fact, its own separate research, quietly published six weeks ago, found "deteriorating business performance" inside the extension zone, compared with improving performance in a control group of businesses just outside it. The same research found a "more =ADpronounced" trend of falling retail sales in the extension zone than outside. It found that the number of people who shopped in the western zone during the week had fallen by two per cent but that there was a rise of one per cent at the weekend, when the charge does not apply.

TfL's leaflet claims that the charge has "helped to reduce vehicle emissions". In fact, its research found that "it has not been possible to identify a clear congestion charging effect' on measured air quality" and that "no clear scheme impact [on air quality] from either the original central or western extension zones can be discerned". TfL claims that the charge has "encouraged people travelling in the area to use public transport". In fact, its research shows that "frequency of residents' travel by car was largely unchanged".

The research - contained in TfL's sixth Congestion Charging Impacts Monitoring Report, published in August - also finds that average bus speeds and bus waiting time in the extension have either not improved or have "deteriorated slightly" since the charge came in. Although there has been a small rise in bus use since the extension came in, the number of people entering the extension zone by bus remains fewer than it was in 2004.

TfL claims in its consultation leaflet that the net revenue loss to transport in London from scrapping the extension would be =A370 million. In fact, its own documents show that extending the charge to the west gained only =A314 million of extra net revenue in its first year - a fifth of the amount claimed.

Even the then Mayor, Ken Livingstone, in an Assembly answer in February, claimed only that the net revenue loss from scrapping the extension would be "=A345-55 million" - and that was on a basis including revenues from the so-called "gas-guzzler" charge of =A325, with no residents' discount. Many residents in the western extension zone own such vehicles. Since this scheme has now been scrapped, the expected revenue loss would now be much less.

On the central question of congestion, TfL says that congestion in the extension zone is broadly the same as it was before the charge. In fact, its own research shows that congestion is significantly worse in each month than in the corresponding month before the charge was introduced.

Congestion in January and February 2007, for example, the last months before the introduction of the charge, was 3.1 minutes per kilometre. Congestion in January and February 2008 was 3.35 minutes per kilometre. The TfL researchers admit: "The rapidity of the deterioration in conditions inside the western extension is striking."

TfL has claimed that the extension's failure to tackle congestion is due in large part to roadworks at a single =ADjunction, the so-called "Scotch House Corner" at the intersection of =ADKnightsbridge and Kensington Road. However, its own research admits that there is "a general deterioration across the [road] network [in the extension], rather than an exaggerated impact [at this =ADlocation]".

TfL says the other single most important factor in the rising congestion is the adjustment of a traffic signal timing at Grosvenor Place in Victoria. However, this traffic signal is not even within the zone, but is on the "free" road running through it.

TfL's leaflet also claims that there has been a reduction in traffic, with 30,000 fewer cars entering the extension each day. This is true. However, the research shows that approximately a third of those cars now divert round the edges of the zone. There are a further extra 3,000 daily car movements in the original central zone as residents in the western extension use their discount privileges to drive into the West End. The total number of car journeys cut by the western extension is thus only 17,000, little more than half that claimed.

A TfL spokeswoman said the organisation's claim of a =A370 million net revenue loss was based on "detailed modelling". She said it was "too early to fully evaluate" whether the "mixed" impacts on business were due to the congestion charge or to wider economic conditions. The spokeswoman said the fact that the Grosvenor Place traffic signal was outside the western extension was "irrelevant" because the traffic delays it caused had a wider knock-on effect. TfL failed to respond to the Standard's other findings.

The extension, covering most of the borough of Kensington and Chelsea plus most of north Westminster, was introduced by Mr Livingstone in February 2007 despite opposition from 71 per cent of local residents and 80 per cent of businesses. The new consultation, by the Mayor, Boris Johnson, offers three options: to keep the extension, scrap it, or modify it, perhaps with a three-hour charge-free "window" in the middle of the day.