ULEZ expansion – Havering Council response

Cllr Ray Morgon, the Leader of Havering Council, has released a statement regarding Havering Council’s views on the confirmation that the London Mayor has decided to expand the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) across all London boroughs from 29 August 2023.

Cllr Morgon writes – 

‘We are very disappointed to hear the London Mayor’s decision to go ahead with the expansion of ULEZ into Havering. This will penalise the residents of this borough as outlined in our consultation submission and request the Mayor reconsider implementation into the outer London boroughs due to their unique circumstances. At the very least this should have been delayed due to the huge impact the cost-of living crisis will play on the lives of our residents, with limited alternative transport options.

We do understand the negative impact of poor air quality on the lives of local residents and others, but pollution levels in inner central London remain much higher than in outer London boroughs. In fact, the GLA recognise that Havering is known to have good air quality, apart from a handful of hotspots.

Furthermore, Havering is already taking action to improve our air quality further with our Air Quality Action Plan and Climate Change Action Plan. Already our Net CO2 emissions are substantially down.

We recognise our views have been listened to in regard to the new scrappage scheme. However, with the high cost of living and the large jump in prices in the second hand car market, this will be yet another pressure on hard working families who are already struggling at the worst possible time. Indeed, even many middle income earning residents within Havering are just as affected by this change and may not be able to afford the change to electric and or other ULEZ compliant vehicles.

We should also not underestimate the impact this will have on key workers travelling in from outside London, including placing our vulnerable residents at risk due to a diminished workforce. They may be put off from choosing Havering because of the extra costs they’ll have to pay. This also has the potential to damage Havering as an authority attracting inward investment and a destination for businesses to locate to. The knock on effect is the lack of job opportunities that they would bring.

Furthermore, the public transport infrastructure in the borough is inadequate and not sufficient to encourage people to move away from cars. We need to see greater investment in Havering’s infrastructure before residents are forced to find alternative solutions that do not currently exist.

The plans to extend the Harold Wood – Harold Hill bus route to Upminster is a welcome start, but falls well short of what is needed in Havering to make the borough better connected and this is particularly true in the south of the borough where businesses have been complaining to us that they can attract workers to their company, but cannot always get them there because of the lack of transport, particularly in light of the doubt over a new Beam Park Station. Indeed, we know that better public transport would go a long way to improve further the air quality in outer London than the ULEZ charge seeks to achieve.

We will continue to strongly lobby as there should be more thinking about the impact this will have on residents, businesses, visitors as well as public services. We will also continue to push for the improvements we need to lessen the impact on those who will be most disadvantaged.’

  1. Hi, considering the ULEZ extension to Havering, one thing I wonder may help, is there a possibility of allowing District line users to carry on, to a “Cranham Terminus” either by tube or walking through? This could cut down on short car journeys dropping off and picking up at Upminster? Should help traffic flow too? It doesn’t answer the question of people effected by having to try and get a compliant vehicle (I am also affected by this) but may at least help environmentally and cost wise for commuters?

    • Dear Andrew,

      In principle, it is a good idea. I have been told that Cranham was originally supposed to be at the end of the District Line, with its own station. However, that did not happen and the costs involved, plus the fact that the sidings appear to be in full use, would likely prevent this now.

      Cllr John Tyler

  2. I understand that the ULEZ standards are set to EURO 3 4 and 6.
    We left the European Union so that we could govern ourselves why
    Are we now following their ruling for ULEZ.This is just another money making scheme to get TFL out of financial trouble which will ruin the
    Lives of poor people of Havering. My husband is 81 in January and I will be 77 next year we have lived in Havering all our married life since
    1966, we have a car which is perfect but does not meet the ULEZ standards we can not afford and do not want a new car, don’t expect we will be alive a lot longer in this money making world but would like to keep our car and our lives as good as possible for the years we have left. Khan must be stopped.

  3. Havering is in Essex not london. Why should we have to pay £12.50to take our children to school. If we don’t take them we will find we will be in trouble. You want to stop me using my car but if I’m rich and can pay the charges that’s ok as far as london mayor concerned. Why are mps so weak to stand up and fight for the people they are there to represent.

  4. Unfairness of the ULEZ expansion project
    Our Council, Havering has voted against the expansion of the ULEZ area but Sadiq Khan has told them that irrespective of their vote and the peoples wishes, he is going ahead and using his powers to impose the charges on us. This is a dictatorship not a devolved democracy. Where will it end?
    The expansion of the ULEZ area to include all boroughs within the M25 is an unfair and retrospective tax which is being imposed without fair consideration of the impact that it will have on a large number of people, particularly pensioners and those that are less well off.
    I bought a Volvo petrol car in 1999 which at the time was considered to be one of the most efficient and long lasting vehicles.
    Over the last 3 years our average mileage is only 1800 miles per year but these journeys are essential and short and public transport cannot be used for them.
    For example public transport is not available to take our grandson from Upminster back to Warley after school, nor is it feasible to travel from Upminster to be at a Riding School for 9am where my wife is a volunteer helper for Riding for the Disabled Association helping disabled children. The stables are not accessible by public transport.
    This tax is unfair and unreasonable because it is imposed daily, no matter what mileage is covered and with no consideration to those where no alternative is available.
    I am 78 and at that age it is not sensible to lay out a huge amount of money to buy a new car or even a compliant second hand vehicle which I have found to be in the region of £15-£20,000. New cars are not readily available and waiting lists are in the region to 10-12months even if one could afford this.
    The expected increase in state pension will not even cover half the cost of this new tax.
    It is the pensioners, the poor and those that have looked after their vehicles and not been profligate in buying new cars every few years, in order to cut down on pollution and damage to the planet by the building of even more new cars that are being punished.
    I fear that many who think that this tax does not affect them now, will find that within two or three years their vehicles will be deemed non compliant.
    It seems that there is nothing that can be done to get this unfair tax deferred until viable travel alternatives are available to those affected.
    Sadiq Khan has boasted that the expansion of the Zone will bring in £300 million and that this is a great success. It is not. The vehicles being charged are still being used, no one wants to pay the charge but they are forced to do so because they have no alternative.
    I sincerely trust that our elected representatives will insist on deferring this tax until viable travel alternatives are available to those affected.
    This unfair tax will further add to inflation The cost of living crisis and mainly benefit foreign car manufacturers adding to our balance of payments deficit.
    What can we do? I think that this is going to be a Poll Tax scenario for Sadiq Khan.
    I have written to our MP Julia Lopez,Rishi Sunak,Sir Keir Starmer,Boris Johnson as well as a number of political commentators on TV and Radio.
    It is up to us to bring what pressure we can to highlight and reverse this undemocratic action by the Mayor of London.

    Richard Moorey.

  5. Havering council say they are opposed to the ULEZ extension, so why have ULEZ cameras been installed in Havering.

    • Martin,

      Havering Council have no control over this. The Mayor of London has the legal right to install the cameras, whether any council objects or not. We understand that the council were not even informed when TfL started installing them.

      Cllr John Tyler

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.