The official site of the Mayor of London and the London Assembly

Your proposals are great but the problem of air pollution is not solved quickly enough with capital investment only. In particular in outer London where there is still an engrained car culture, you need to win hearts and minds to buy into your policy. teach people how to cycle. have car free days and street parties. gradually increase parking permit charges for non electric cars. remove all charges for bicycle parking (in some local authorities renting a bike hanger costs just as much as a parking permit). teach parents at school about the benefits of walking and cycling (we still have loads of parents doing school runs by car in our area!). incentivise public sector employees to switch modes of transport. outlaw all car parking for new developments. introduce a car parking tax for retailers or companies providing car parking. there needs to be a real campaign to tackle air quality and before we get everyone on board, we have children growing up in toxic air.

£12 for driving in central London at anytime and this fare goes from 12 to 12 so if I want to go at 11pm (when there is no traffic) and get out of the city center at 1am I have to pay double for 2 hours rather than if I drive in central London from 12am and 24 hours after. This system is just ridiculous, does my car not contaminate after Tower Bridge? This is a completely rip off. I would like to know if all the public cars are paying too this ridiculous amount E.g official cars, ambulances, buses, taxi drivers, police cars, etc... or maybe these cars doesn't contaminate. The elections are coming soon Mr Khan. Thank you! 

The planned Silvertown Tunnel project will likely accomplish the precise opposite of its aims. Please reconsider pursuing this project further. Even losing some of the contractual agreed amount of the £1bn would ultimately improve the environment and transportation situation for Londoners. City planning studies have repeatedly shown that introducing more roads and other infrastructure such as tunnels simply 'induces demand' [source provided below], generating more traffic flows in order to fill this newfound capacity. The outcome is that this tunnel will give further route options for drivers, the most polluting transportation per person in London. This will generate localised air pollution for those local communities and work against aims to reduce the number of cars on our roads.

I can appreciate that in the run up to an election, backing out of a contracted agreement could appear 'weak', but what would be a stronger message for an open London than doubling down spending on cycle lanes, pedestrianised areas and electric buses? The cycleway project that is reshaping one of Southwark's main roads costs £50m, imagine what could done with the tunnel budget.

Source: CityLab's article 'CityLab University: Induced Demand'

Can we please have more RED ROUTES for buses. BigBren, Holland Park.

There are cars clogging up the roads mostly with a single occupant, holding up buses full of commuters. Can we please have more

    RED ROUTES  BigBren, Holland Park.

In this, the era of post irony, the London Assembly announces that clean air is residents' biggest concern at the same time as Greggs announce moped deliveries for their vegan sausage rolls!

Wood burning fires the new fetish of middle class people is causing shed loads of small particle pollution (2.5PM) similiar to diesel engines. They need to be banned in urban areas if you are serious about improving air quality. 

Until you get diesels off the road, Stricter emmisions testing is vital, a car that's had its DPF deliberatley removed should warrant a £10.000 fine for both MOT garage and the vehicle owner

black cabs shouldn't be exempt from ulez 

don't even think about giving Uber it's license back

Like many others I think this is just not ambitious enough.

The money is derisory - how can you propose such a small amount? Multiply this by 10 at least.

ULEZ must be made to apply to taxis immediately to improve air quality.

Bus targets for 2037 are far too slow - should be 2027. No new vehicles for LT should be bought that are not electric.

And trees - where are these in the plan and general greening of the city?

£2.1m? Is that it? This is THE if not one of the top priorities for the city. We have to take climate action, and people are dying of respiratory illness related to poor air quality. If I move out of London, air quality will be one of the tops drivers. £2m is miserly and shows that this is not considered a real issue. 

Be more ambitious with the carbon free pledges! 2037 for buses is a long way off, and these impact both carbon goals and wellbeing.

Generally speaking the ULEZ and CC are good incentives to lower driving of high emitting vehicles, but there are still a huge number on the roads, particularly delivery vehicles and taxis. More incentives to switch to collaborative last mile delivery, or green delivery vehicles, would be welcomed.

Trees and green space also help; more ambitious plans for this would be great,

That is a ridiculous budget figure, amounting to 24p per person in the area. Please can we have environmental spending at a more sane level like £100 per person!

And no "Two year pauses"

Please quote all budget figures per-person in future, rather than disingenuosly xxx million.

Just been walking in Central London (Congestion Charge area). A cold day. An endless number of private cars, coaches and cabs stationary and parked with their engine idling. In the street where I live coaches regularly park for hours with engine on. 

How can policy makers look credible on their effort to improve air quality when this simple rule cannot be enforced with heavy fines. 

At present I am told, Metropolitan Police can only issue a warning. In many nearby countries fines can be issued on the spot (Eur 130 in Belgium and France). 

It is ridicules that TFL think that it is OK to charge individuals ULEZ and not black cabs, this is just another very good example of TFL's officer corrupting the issue of sustainability to generate income. This is exactly what he did with parking in Camden Council, he corrupted the parking enforcement to generate income with a blatant disregard for what was fair, reasonable and lawful and this is why his position was made untenable and he left for TFL.

All Taxis need to be part of the ULEZ. If privare cars need clean engines so do all public vehicles. No more dirty diesel black cabs, all vehicles need to be part of this scheme.

The proposed budget seems promising, especially in the area of expanding the ULEZ along with the continued investment in London's public transport infrastructure.

However I'm very disappointed by the lack of harmonisation of London's cycle infrastructure, TfL's move to do away with the Cycle Superhighway and Quietway distinction is admirable but the fact remains that many structural axes of the cycle network are underdeveloped or even dangerous. I'm a frequent commuter on CS1, and its lack of proper separation of motor and cycle traffic, along with its lack of priority at intersections jumps to mind as a pertinent example on what the problem is.

It seems that many cycle projects focus on signposting cyclists away from main roads and onto more quiet one even though a comprehensive cycle network must strive to be fast and continuous. protected intersections and good continuity often doesn't happen satisfactorily.

I'm also quite outraged at the decision to go ahead with the Silvertown tunnel, the last thing we need is an urban motorway bringing in more induced demand for motor traffic that ever in southeast London.

And finally circling back to the electrification of London's bus fleet, I think that trolleybuses should be considered. Trolleybuses have all the benefits of electric busses (little to no noise, fast acceleration, heavily reduced pollution) without having to worry about sourcing heavy and environmentally iffy lithium batteries.

Would be good to hear news of the Bakerloo Line Extension here. So much housing is coming to the Old Kent Road and Queens Road. All this is needed but how can all these new residents possibly fit onto our already overstretched Overground and buses. The success of all these develpements rests and falls on transport infrastructure. Please put this in place before the houses are bought and let not the other way round. 

This is all good, except that we shouldn't have to wait until 2037 for all buses to be zero-emission. And why not introduce an extra charge on SUVs?  No one needs them in a city, yet more and more of them are appearing, usually with just one person inside, dominating the roads and causing a great deal of pollution. 

All good ideas.

Working with businesses to increase, where possible, the agile working options, so that more people can work from home.

Tackling polluting cars and increasing the low emission ground is also good. However, there is also a number of high speed cars, SUVs that are contributing to higher emissions and there is no mentioning on how to ensure there is a fair cost distribution, so that it is not always down to the largest community trying to make the month end that is charged for tackling the London Air Quality issue. 

Reducing or switching off, based on weather conditions, air conditioning in offices, businesses, public transport. I sometimes set on trains where the air conditioning was so strong that it was freezing, despite outside the temperature was mild. I sit in offices where the air conditioning is constantly and unnecessarily on.

Rejecting the new runaway at Heathrow and ensure there is a more efficient use of the current airlines and slots, to reduce the number of empty/half flights.

Building new bridges south of Tower Bridge, to allow more cyclist and pedestrian to cross the river avoiding the central London route.

Use solar power or wind power to support greener cars and public transport.

Use more of vertical gardens, already a reality in other cities.

one major change i think is desperately needed is an extra charge for HGV's with that being significantly higher for using the roads from the start of the morning rush hour to the end of the evening one perhaps matching the 7-7 bus lane rules. if its essential to transport the items during those times they'll pay otherwise they'll transport when its cheaper and reduce congestion during the day, and the added pollution caused. 

Whilst all lithium electric may be a future goal the infrastructure doesnt exist and will take years to create at a huge cost and needs significant thought. Hydrogen powered vehicles may be a more realistic option though more research is needed into the water electrolysis process of getting hydrogen to create the greenest options which may result in a combined hydrogen lithium combination as the best way forward. 

An electric vehicle takes hours to charge though this is reducing but fast charging historically destroys batteries the costs and environmental impacts of all options should be considered from creating the battery to generating the electricity to charge it and the ultimate end by products from all aspects of creation to use. 

All the proposals are good steps forward.

Please investigage MOT test centres and check whether the emissions tests they do are rigorous enough. Best of all would be stricter standards for exhaust pollution in London.

Making people pay to drive in the ULEZ is a good start, but we really need to retire the old polluting cars as fast as possible.

The other issue - and I can see this is tricky for the Assembly to tackle - is that the filter systems which catch the worst diesel pollution do not operate when the air temperature goes below a certain point. This varies by make and model but is roughly between 5 and 8 degrees celsius. This means that on this beautiful bright crisp cold morning today, with a temperature of 3-4 degrees, the air quality was dreadful. 

While I applaud both the MOL Walking and Cycle Plans I find it interesting that the Walking Plan neither shows in the pictures nor describes in the text that pedestrians are expected to share the public footpath with bicycles, skateboards and scooters (electric and manual). In addition, pictures in the Cycle Action Plan largely show cyclists using the roadway.    

My experience is that where local cycle ways have been provided many (if not most) have been sculpted from existing pedestrian footpaths rather than the roadways.  This presents further dangers to walking public who now have fast moving "traffic" sharing their space and may even be approaching, unseen and unheard, from behind.

I would like to see included a directive encouarging local authorities to:

1. Use civil enforcement officer to regulate this non walking "traffic" on footpaths:

2. Avoid reducing reducing the pedestrian footpath area in order to provide cycle paths.

I live in a flat and have realistically no access to food composting. Please provide local communal compost bins that one can access by bikes as most flat residents in central London don't have a car or provide collection services.

Helicopter flights over London and use of the London Heliport in Battersea needs to be restricted to emergency use only. In particular, sightseeing flights should cease completely. 

Take-off and landing create the most pollution (both atmospheric and noise). This effect is multiplied by the "tens" of flight movements from early morning to late evening, seven days a week.

This cannot be allowed to continue as there are many forms of alternative, highly efficient and more environmentally forgiving forms of transport available.

The delayed Elizabeth Line opening is a disgrace.

Everyone knows that large infrastructure projects like this run the risk of over-running and going over budget. So TfL and the Mayor's claimed failure to have not known what was happening is inexcusable. TfL and the Mayor need to have a single independent contact person working within the consortium of contractors whose job it is to know what is going on and report it to them.

And TfL needs its lawyers to create better contracts for such projects; contracts that penalise project over-runs and unbudgetted costs, so that contractors are motivated to deliver on time and on budget.

Small particle (PM2.5) air pollution in the tube system has been repeatedly reported as worse than above ground, recently by around four times worse.

https://airqualitynews.com/2019/11/29/air-pollution-on-london-undergroun...

Yet the Mayor and TfL make lots of noise about traffic pollution and keep quiet about the polluted air in the tube system. TfL should spend money on infrastructure level (i.e. huge quantities and scale of) particulate cleaning equipment across the London tube network to tackle this major issue for Londoner's health.