|
|
 |
| |
Anti - 4x4 drive
• IF imitation is the highest form of flattery, what did the Green Party do to get Councillor Mike Greene to start on bashing 4x4 car owners?
Most sensible, sensitive folk will agree with the anti-4x4 sentiments of Cllr Greene. I certainly do.
However, has he considered the plight of those volunteers for Scout and Guide tasks who offer their 4x4s free to tow canoe racks, trailers and other scouting kit. Could they be given an exemption badge?
If they were, it might give rise to some 4x4 owners joining the voluntary sector. If not, an important aspect of youth activities is likely to be stifled.
PETER CUMING
Talacre Road, NW5
• PERHAPS Blake Ludwig and his Environmental Taliban can explain how a 4x4 parked in a private Camden drive pollutes less than a 4x4 parked in a public Camden street (Forum, Jan 18)
Indeed perhaps he can explain how a parked 4x4 pollutes at all. Road pricing for cars is the answer Mr Ludwig, including those hopelessly inefficient electric cars you champion.
Patrick Uden
Rochester Place, NW1
• THE council’s proposal, reported last week, to charge 60 per cent more to park large-engined cars is a cynical sop to very real concerns about urban 4x4s.
The Lib Dems and Tories are jumping on a green bandwagon, but this policy will be totally ineffective. Few if any people who can afford to own and run a 4x4 will be deterred by a £50 a year premium.
Instead they may think that having paid their £50 they can drive their SUV with a clear conscience.
However such vehicles not only accelerate climate change, they also clog up streets for other road users.
They are not appropriate for Camden. An effective policy would be to give a reasonable notice period (say three years) and then ban on-street parking of 4x4s altogether.
The council have missed an opportunity to act in favour of the vast majority who don’t benefit from owing 4x4s but who suffer their manifold adverse effects.
Name and address supplied |
 |
|
|
|
