Saturday, October 17, 2009

Congestion taxing to rear its ugly head once more - if Bloomberg Gets in - Here's what we're in for




As if trampling New York citizens' right to chose by referendum (re: term limits) isn't enough, this out-of-touch billionaire's pet congestion pricing tax is again looming within view with the upcoming election.

The below is extracted from Bloomberg's own news website. We're certain if re-elected, Bloomberg will ensure that New York will be a mirror of London and the divide between the middle-class and rich will widen due to congestion pricing. How many more small businesses will Bloomberg kiss goodbye to? Congestion taxing is COSTING London businesses almost $500-million dollars a year, and we can bet it's the small businesses that are most affected.

[Bloomberg News] The London Chamber of Commerce and Industry says it all - as they have said in the past (accents are mine):

[ London's Mayor to Increase Underground, Bus Fares
Bloomberg
The city's traffic-congestion charge also increases next year, to as much as 10 pounds a day from 8 pounds, the mayor said. “We are in desperate need of ... ]
London will introduce a new automated direct-debit system for collecting the congestion charge, and the fee will increase to 10 pounds [ that's $15.97 U.S. dollars!! ] by December 2010 for drivers who don’t use the system, and 9 pounds for those who do, he said.
The higher congestion charge “will mean less money in businesses’ bank accounts and fewer customers in the capital’s shops,” Helen Hill, director of policy at the London Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said in an e-mailed statement. The higher fares will place “even more financial pressure on London’s businesses and their employees as we try and make the jump from recession to recovery.”
Cost of Decline
The economic decline will cost Transport for London, the city’s transportation agency, a total of 300 million pounds this year [ that's $ 479,171,235 U.S. dollars!! ], mostly through lost ticket and advertising revenue, an aide to the mayor said. Passenger traffic is expected to fall by as much 6 percent in 2010 and won’t pick up before 2012, said Peter Hendy, London transport commissioner.
http://www.londonchamber.co.uk/DocImages/264.pdf

London Chamber of Commerce and Industry in 2005.


Bloomberg touts London as fine example of the benefits of congestion pricing. (New Yorkers, you have to be crazy to go for this, please read the numbers below - And, I've not news for you, it does not get better in 2006)

[Impact of the scheme on business

Our Findings

The LCCI firmly believes that any system to address congestion within London should
not have an adverse effect on London's businesses.

In order to ascertain the impact of the scheme on the capital’s key retail sector, we carried out three surveys of retailers, after
six, twelve and eighteen months of the scheme’s operation. Our results have shown that
congestion charging has created many problems for businesses.

The findings of our most(12)
recent survey show that:

• 84.2% of retail businesses have reported that their takings are down year on year
• 62.7% of retailers recorded a fall in customer numbers since the introduction of the charge

• 37% of respondents stated they had laid off staff specifically because of the
effects of the charge

• 33% of retail businesses within the zone say they are planning to re-locate because of reduced takings while 28% said they were considering closing their business


92% of retail businesses do not believe the congestion charge has benefited their business

The London Chamber is very concerned that the current congestion charging scheme is
damaging businesses, and is, therefore, extremely worried that to increase the charge by
60% will only serve to increase the difficulties encountered by business. - From the London Chamber of Commerce and Industry - "Response to the Consultation on the Proposed Cost Increase to the Congestion Charging Scheme"Campaigns Team

It seems our local papers, Downtown Express and Villager are supporting Bloomberg - I thought local papers were supposed to reflect the voice of people! Where were DTE and Villagers when it came to Bloomberg's shredding of term limits??



-Geoff Lee, Chinatown resident

1 comment:

Geoff Lee said...

http://www.londonchamber.co.uk/DocImages/264.pdf

London Chamber of Commerce and Industry in 2005.

Yeah, Bloomberg touts London as fine example of the benefits of congestion pricing. (New Yorkers, you have to be crazy to go for this, please read the numbers below - And, I've not news for you, it does not get better in 2006)

[Impact of the scheme on business

Our Findings

The LCCI firmly believes that any system to address congestion within London should
not have an adverse effect on London's businesses.

In order to ascertain the impact of the scheme on the capital’s key retail sector, we carried out three surveys of retailers, after
six, twelve and eighteen months of the scheme’s operation. Our results have shown that
congestion charging has created many problems for businesses.

The findings of our most(12)
recent survey show that:

• 84.2% of retail businesses have reported that their takings are down year on year
• 62.7% of retailers recorded a fall in customer numbers since the introduction of the charge

• 37% of respondents stated they had laid off staff specifically because of the
effects of the charge

• 33% of retail businesses within the zone say they are planning to re-locate because of reduced takings while 28% said they were considering closing their business

• 92% of retail businesses do not believe the congestion charge has benefited their business

The London Chamber is very concerned that the current congestion charging scheme is
damaging businesses, and is, therefore, extremely worried that to increase the charge by
60% will only serve to increase the difficulties encountered by business.

It seems our local papers, Downtown Express and Villager are supporting Bloomberg - I thought local papers were supposed to reflect the voice of people! Where were DTE and Villagers when it came to Bloomberg's shredding of term limits??

To DTE and Villager - you're supporting a guy who ignored public referendum! Are you private newspapers now?