Drivers have slammed “bizarre” and “grossly unfair” plans by Green Party councillors to charge SUV and large vehicle owners more to park in Oxford. The Mail has the story.
The scheme would bring the university city in line with the likes of Paris, which has seen parking charges triple for drivers of 4x4s, and Bath, which introduced an emissions-based parking charge last year.
Oxford’s councillors argue that larger and heavier cars not only cause more damage to roads but are more likely to kill or injure pedestrians and cause secondary illnesses through its emissions.
Yet motorists have said increasing the city’s already expensive car parking charges – which can reach up to £39.10 for a day – would be “ridiculous” with taxi drivers and traders claiming they would have to stop working in the city.
Emily Kerr, a Green Party councillor who proposed the policy, told MailOnline the plans were a “common sense” approach to the worldwide issue of cars getting bigger while our roads stay the same size.
She said: “As the Green Party in Oxford we put forward a motion to the city council to investigate size, weight and emission based parking charges. This would mean that larger and heavier cars would pay more.
“It is undeniable that bigger cars take up more space and we have seen that cars have grown hugely – the Mini has grown 60%, the Golf has grown 40% – and car parking spaces are based off old cars.
“So what you are seeing now is that there is not enough space in car parks, a car might physically be able to fit in a space but they cannot open their doors when another vehicle is next to it.”
Drivers in Oxford, however, slammed the proposed policy claiming that the public would view it as nothing more than a “cash grab” from the council.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I assume EV’s will be caught in this “keeping you safe” larceny given that they are about 25% heavier than ICE vehicles relative to volume?
Obviously this will simply be the tip of the iceberg, next it will be all cars with five gears. Isn’t if wonderful how these people get to play God once they are voted in to power? Given that Oxford is signed up to the Khant’s 100 Cities movement it can only be a couple of years max before the city is wholly devoid of vehicles and the population starts to move away.
This is sheer criminality.
Certain German cities, eg, Bayreuth, only charge for parking ICE-cars.
“Oxford’s councillors argue that larger and heavier cars not only cause more damage to roads but are more likely to kill or injure pedestrians and cause secondary illnesses through its emissions.”
cause more damage to roads:
in that case we must also banish buses, delivery vans, ambulances, police vans, fire engines, construction vehicles…
more likely to kill or injure pedestrians:
SUVs are particularly popular with mums; I’ve never once heard of an SUV killing a pedestrian, have you? On the other hand, white van men driving at 90mph, angry cyclists jumping the red lights, ‘youths’ on enduro ebikes on the pavements….they are genuine threats to pedestrians
cause secondary illnesses through its emissions:
Modern cars are engineering marvels: amazingly quiet, clean, efficient, luxurious. And car technology will only continue to improve in the future (if our WEF overlords allow it). I cannot believe these councillors in leafy Oxford are complaining about air quality and ‘secondary illnesses’, what a joke.
And why are cars so much larger?
Cars are bigger because the safety cells, airbags, crumple zones and more mandated by government regulation all need plenty of space in order to fit them.
So governments force manufacturers to make bigger cars and then penalise motorists for having bigger cars.
Brilliant! Not!
Bang on, varmint. It really is a dastardly clever plan to hijack the environmental movement and use it to surreptitiously roll out hidden communist polices that sound good to an unsuspecting public. We all know – well, on here at least – that the climate emergency was nothing more than the beginning of a soft coup and the way to introduce increasingly harsh laws. Their trick is to do things by increment so the public gets used to yet another restriction or hurdle to living a free life. And shout about this from the rooftops and you’re called a conspiracist – another clever trick to shut up dissent and alternative opinion.
‘Slammed’ is not good enough. It will still go ahead regardless whilst the majority of people are blinded by their outrage, shaking their heads over polite conversations
Democracy is dead, I’m afraid, in case you didn’t know it
Or…
Our salvation will not arrive via the ballot box.
Definitely a cash grab. I know that a lot of people who drive big, powerful, expensive cars are dick heads but I don’t agree with charging them more. We really don’t need any more feminization the current level is already toxic enough.
“feminization?”
Lost me on that one.
It’s the whole gist of things. I suppose you could look at the willow and the oak, the yang and the yin. The force behind this is essentially one which seeks to demonstrate that we have moved beyond, transcended. That which we needed to move beyond, was for them the masculine. That’s at least how they sell it. They talk about Mother Earth, the rape of the environment etc, the phallic enterprise of mining.
I don’t agree with your interpretation but thanks for the response.
Perhaps it’s an extension of – ‘does my bum look big in this?”…
The only thing I can think of when Mcstiff mentions “feminisation” is that a lot of women drive a Qashqai etc because they have several kids to be taking to school and the shops etc.
I wouldn’t worry too much about the progress of this agenda because things will be more serious in the near future and green energy will be the last thing on anyone’s mind. It has to happen in terms of the decay at the end of a civilisation. It could’ve been worse. Crisis cults always appear in times of uncertainty. In the end there is even hope for invasion. According to Kenneth Clark in his book and film called Civlisation he recounted how the Alexandrians were so bored with their ciivilisation that they welcomed invasion in the seventh century. Apathy, anomie, disregard – these things are natural in our time. That is why the Greeks developed three philosophies to accomodate this situation. It is shocking for the members of a culture or empire that the collapse comes soon after the time of their greatest achievements.
You are getting a bit of the beaten track there. ——-Green Energy, Net Aero and all climate policies and technologies are VERY bad news NOW. —–The most important commodity is energy. But our eco socialist governments (Con and Labour) are taking affordable energy away. This is and will have devastating consequences for our standard of living and our freedom. All under false pretences of a climate crisis.
Acksherly, I don’t disapprove of this measure. I think people’s cars reflect their ego and I’m personally fed up of these monster vehicles drawing up beside my Fiesta at junctions and completely blocking my view. Why people reason that a civilian APC is just what they need I don’t know, but if you can afford one, you can afford the parking charges.
So ner.
You need to see the bigger picture. The Green agenda isn’t just about cars. But eg in London people who paid out good money and in good faith for the car they could afford are suddenly being told that car is not going to be allowed to go anywhere unless they pay £12.50. because of Low emission zones. ———Don’t you think you are being a bit selfish that you are not happy if someone else has a bigger vehicle than you? Not everyone has a larger vehicle for the purposes of ego. They may have 3 children or elderly parents or both. There was never a time when we hassled people out of parking spaces because their car was bit bigger. —–But that is what the green agenda is all about——restricting all human activities.—-Your gas central heating, your petrol and diesel car, your flights abroad, the affordability of our electricity, whether we should stop eating meat etc etc. —-Green always only means one thing ——-Less of everything and all under the false pretences of a climate crisis. ——–PS Councils now have the audacity to blame pot holes on climate change. Isn’t that very convenient as it relieves them of their responsibility to fix them, as it was all our own fault because of our CO2 causing global warming?
I sympathize with Jane but there is a safety aspect. A friend of mine had an accident in her small car v. a large car and spent the next 6 months in hospital – the other guy had barely a scratch – and is still limping around today. That does not mean we should all drive around in tanks, whereby a Rolls Royce would be nice, but I never feel safe in a small car. That said, the increase in size of Minis, etc., is largely due to the addition of crunch zones around the body.
So those of us with smaller cars just have to lump it when someone with 3 kids decide they need to hog more space? (It used to be possible to transport an average family in a saloon car) I liken it to the question of whether someone weighing 30 plus stones should pay for 2 plane seats or allow their neighbour to be uncomfortably squashed.
I could afford a larger car but it’s not something I would value, and it would be harder to find a parking space (and fit into the garage!) so my point is not made through envy.
If you think that’s a problem (I tend to agree with that) work on convincing people that MBTs are not sensible city vehicles instead of inventing – tata! – yet another so-called “sin tax”. We’re speedily approaching the point where basically everything people do is being taxed using the pretext that someone claims to be convinced that they shouldn’t be doing it. This trend should be stopped (or rather, reverted) before we’re all carrying ‘smart’ breathing measurement device to ensure that we’re paying the correct amount of CO₂ emission tax for every time we exhale.
The German CO₂ emission tax which isn’t formally a tax because this would be unconstitutional is justified in the following way:
The atmosphere is a public good.
Therefore, the state is responsible for managing it.
Therefore, it can demand rent payments for its use.
Imagine that: Green politicians seeking rent payments for atmosphere use. Who gave it to them?
“It is undeniable that bigger cars take up more space and we have seen that cars have grown hugely – the Mini has grown 60%”
oh, so the Mini has grown from the size of a suitcase….to the size of a…. normal small car
remind me again, what is the point of government? it takes our hard earned money, threatens us if we don’t pay, lines its own pockets, and then causes terrible problems in society
750,000 extra immigrants every year take up more space also. Maybe we should charge them an “immigrant tax”——–No chance.
The new Minis are hardly a normal small car. They are enormous!
“nothing more than a “cash grab” from the council.”
Don’t forget yet more control over the Proles – gives councillors a warm, cosy feeling.
It is certainly true that parking your car with ample room to get in and out is difficult. Apart from bigger vehicles, car parks like to squeeze as many spaces in as possible and it’s not the first accident I have had trying to navigate / negotiate spaces that are too small.