Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Endinburgh Council
 
 
Saturday, 7th November 2009 Change Date

Gas guzzler tax set for green light next spring

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Edinburgh Evening News site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 11 February 2009
A TAX on gas guzzlers in Edinburgh is set to be introduced by spring next year – but only after disgruntled motorists have another chance to protest.
Councillors have given the green light for the scheme which will see the cost of residents' parking permits linked to CO2 emissions or engine size, after it won the backing of an initial public consultation.

Drivers will now have another chance to have their say on the proposals when a statutory consultation on the plans is launched in September.

Under the proposals, owners of vehicles such as Land Rovers and the Citroen C6 would see charges double from the current £160 a year to £320. But drivers of the least polluting vehicles in the outer zones would see their permit prices fall from £80 to just £15.

Residents would also face higher charges for second vehicles, with a bill of £400 for the most polluting vehicles. Results of the next stage of consultation will be fed back to councillors for a final vote next February, with the scheme not likely to be in place until the following April.

Responses to the council's "Park Green" consultation found 73 per cent of respondents in favour, with 68 per cent of parking permit holders who responded also in support of the scheme.

Opposition councillors today claimed this consultation process, which saw more than 60,000 letters delivered to permit holders and residents but only elicited 1670 responses, did not go far enough.

But city leaders today hailed approval for the scheme as a big step forward for improving air quality in the Capital.

Councillor Mark McInnes, the city's Tory transport and environment spokesman, said: "There has been a total lack of proper consultation on the issue from the council and I think this will be evident in the next, more formal, phase.

"I just refuse to believe that only nine people in the entire city wrote a letter of objection on this issue."

The majority of people who answered the survey did so online.

There were 18 written submissions and 47 e-mails in favour, with nine and 38 against respectively.

Councillor Robert Aldridge, the city's environment leader, said: "This represents a great step forward. It is going to take a little while before this is implemented but it certainly sends the right message that people driving cars which damage our environment will not be rewarded.

"We have committed to improving air quality in this city and this initiative will assist greatly in achieving this goal."

Green councillor Steve Burgess, who initially proposed the scheme, said: "I am delighted with the public response to this consultation. This is not about fat-cat charges, it is a charge aimed at reducing pollution levels."




The full article contains 464 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

brandy al,

embra 11/02/2009 12:10:45
If you can afford a gas guzzler,you can afford the tax.
2

Incandescent,

11/02/2009 12:12:45
#1 Illogical, captain.
3

Cappo Del Monte,

11/02/2009 12:16:58
#2 1 is perfectly logical
Its great to see all the rich and non enviromentalists supporting the smaller car drivers with reduced parking permits, you have to lov em.

now queue petril heids usual repetative guff
4

Geo_1875,

Edinburgh 11/02/2009 12:31:46
#1 I take it you also support huge increases in council tax for those people who can "afford" to live in houses valued at 3 or 4 times the average.
5

Incandescent,

11/02/2009 12:32:06
#3 Irrelevant, captain. It's a revenue tax plain and simple, the door for which has been opened by the gullible.
6

DAVID,

Edinburgh 11/02/2009 12:33:26
Green fascism and revenue generation, as no 5 says.

And as usual with Edinburgh council, it's non-democratic as there is no way to fight back against this change.
7

Unimpressed one,

11/02/2009 12:39:48
More green idiocy in the name of 'saving the planet'. No doubt McLaren and Dixon will be telling us how effective this will be in 'reducing our carbon footprint'. Scotland is fast becoming an eco-basket case. With a proposed ban on most transportation by 2050 and power that depends on the wind blowing, we are well on course at reducing our population by a mass exodus.

8

Mehe,

edinburgh 11/02/2009 12:45:31
those on the largest incomes should be taxed until they are left earning minium wages. then we can all rejoice in our communist state. Then all the neds who just want to lie around breeding all day can do so in peace while claiming loads of taxes.
9

Bored,

11/02/2009 12:46:24
I have a gas guzzler and a motorbike. The gas guzzler has been parked as I mostly used the bike. I guess it will have to be the other way round now. Use the gas guzzler and park the bike.
10

,

11/02/2009 12:49:51
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
11

Foo,

11/02/2009 12:50:37
warukunai desu
12

,

11/02/2009 12:58:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
13

Incandescent,

11/02/2009 12:59:02
#11 Shinjirarenai
14

Bring Back Poll Tax,

11/02/2009 13:02:57
"But city leaders today hailed approval for the scheme as a big step forward for improving air quality in the Capital."

Did we really vote in morons who think that a parked Range Rover with its engine switched off uses 4 or 5 times more fuel than a Panda with its engine turned off......

Oh well, back to the drawing board.
15

Foo,

11/02/2009 13:04:39
#12

ehhhhhhhh.

No.

16

Xena - Warrior Princess,

11/02/2009 13:05:45
I suspect the majority voted for this because their bill would come down and obviously they didn't have a gas guzzler. I also agree the green bandwagon is ideal as a money maker, on the other hand why does someone living in the city centre need a Range Rover?
17

Foo,

11/02/2009 13:08:53
#11

Anatawa nihongo o hanashimasuka?

Kore wa omoshiroi desune?
18

Foo,

11/02/2009 13:10:23
#13 Sumimasen (#17)!

Anatawa nihongo o hanashimasuka?

EricShaun wa tsumaranai desune?
19

Ron D,

Enybru 11/02/2009 13:16:20
"Drivers will now have another chance to have their say". What's the point? I think we can assume they'll be against it. Ban them completely - no zoned permits for 4x4s.
20

Leithboy,

11/02/2009 13:17:01
#9 Like you I too have a gas guzzler and a push bike.
I use the Gas Guzzler to transport me my wife and 3 work colleges to work and back in West Lothian 5 days a week.
I use the push bike for most journeys in Edinburgh.
I already set stung for higher fuel prices than average (only runs on super unleaded)
I already get stung for higher road tax than average
I already get stung for Higher insurance than average
I already get stung for the speed cameras(is this relevant ?)
This vehicle was bought six years ago when virtually no one knew or gave a hoot about co2's and the goverment was happy to take my cash in abundance.
Solution, I am going to sell the push bike and use the gas guzzler everywhere now just to make sure I am getting my moneys worth.
These vehicles will soon be a thing of the past.
"Live fast die laughing"
21

Dunaskin,

Edinburgh 11/02/2009 13:18:28
The BBC item on this points out that the revenue to the Council will fall by £50k, but that this is cheap compared to the fines for poor air quality. So maybe it isn't a revenue tax, and the Council is doing a bit of forward thinking. As well as selective reporting by the EEN, but then what's new?
22

bertiblunt,

11/02/2009 13:19:32
the residents need to wake up , they brought this on themselves with constant complaints and sneaky phonecalls to the council regarding workers parking in thier street, now the council you pay is ripping you off. this is the reason i moved accross the bridge and i have a 3 bedroom house with a driveway big enough for 6 cars, and the laughable thing is that it probally cost less than the 1 bedroom flats in edinburgh
23

,

11/02/2009 13:23:09
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
24

,

11/02/2009 13:23:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
25

Incandescent,

11/02/2009 13:24:29
#18 Many years ago but very rusty now. If you mean to ask literally "do you know how to speak", go with HanaSEmasuka, rather than Hanashimasuka, which is used for are/will/shall you speak. Oh, and chuck in "ga" instead of o/wo.

Yes.
26

Dunaskin,

Edinburgh 11/02/2009 13:26:04
I don't believe that an annual parking charge of £80, £160 or even £320 is going to make anyone move to Fife. Bertiblunt gives the game away - his 3-bed house is so much cheaper than in town. But then what does he pay to commute every working day, both money and time?
27

Bill MacD,

11/02/2009 13:26:08
Good news. The fat morons who drive these monsters out of a misguided sense of their own inflated self-importance deserve to be taxed heavily just for their own ugly stupidity.
28

Hmm ...,

11/02/2009 13:30:40
... this LibDem scheme is in line with Party thinking - the LibDems introduced his daft "gas guzzling" levy on parked cars in Richmond, Surrey when they were in power there as well.

And regarding the suggestion that no one needs a 4x4 in Edinburgh? First the roads are rubbish and 4x4 suspension reduces the likelihood of damage. But I think that people who live in Edinburgh don't have it to drive in Edinburgh itself. A small car would be more economical and cheaper to run in town (road damage apart), they have it because they need it away from Edinburgh. It is probably parked for most of the week, creating no emissions at all.

But of course, it is not 4x4s that the LibDems are attacking - it is ANY larger car which will be caught up by this money raiser. And the LibDems aren't at all concerned with why the owner needs the larger car, they are too busy seeing him as a cash cow to be taxed "because he can afford it"!

Hypocrites!!
29

reincarnated,

Edinburgh 11/02/2009 13:34:17
My 'gas guzzler' 4x4 does 43 mpg in town.
30

A Friend of Fernando Poo,

11/02/2009 13:35:52
Wouldn't it be fairer just to put a local tax on petrol? That way they'd hit the people who really do use the most.
31

Hmm ...,

11/02/2009 13:35:53
... Bill McD (27) seems to have a chip on the same shoulder as Jenny McArthur, from whom we haven't heard for some time now. Same lack of logic, same chip, same bile! Same poster?
32

bertiblunt,

11/02/2009 13:37:43
#26 it only costs me £30 a week for fuel and i dont mind the travelling, my council tax is cheaper and my all round standard of living is far more enjoyable and healthier than living in edinburgh, I lived in edinburgh for 25 years so it doesnt really have anything for me anymore
33

Just another day,

Edinburgh 11/02/2009 13:42:38
So, if you have a gas guzzler but your house has a driveway or a private off-road parking space, you don't have to pay for a permit and won't incur the additional cost, even though it is meant to be linked to the CO2 emissions/engine size. You can still park outside your property and drive in and around town as often as you please at no extra cost, whilst your neighbour, who doesn't have a driveway has to pay double the permit charge. Hardly seems fair.
34

Incandescent,

11/02/2009 13:47:01
#27 Bill McArthur

"...a misguided sense of their own inflated self-importance"

Dear oh dear, what a sentence! Both misguided AND inflated? Which is it to be? "their own... self-importance"? Well it's hardly going to be somebody elses, is it?
35

Foo,

11/02/2009 13:48:18
#23 - Who on earth is Walter? Did it take you all that time to translate tsumaranai? ow about this, baka yaro?

#25 - Hey ho, what's a ga and a ka between radges?
36

,

11/02/2009 13:54:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
37

PeterPete,

11/02/2009 13:54:31
60,000 letters of consultation - how much more do they want?

But most people will pay less, so what is the problem?

The headline should be "CEC gives majority a chance to pay less than before - and still people complain"

Says a lot about Edinburgh
38

,

11/02/2009 13:54:56
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
39

Incandescent,

11/02/2009 13:57:13
#35 Now, Tony. The OVCs from your Homebase laminate flooring combined with the ascetic acid from schoolkids' chips are far more likely to contribute to your problems.
40

Cappo Del Monte,

11/02/2009 14:35:51
#5 We have to pay for the great tram system somehow, so its reasonable for the rich to help pay for it.

#10
Got a lovely MX8 sadly only on an 08 plate, but I dont need to park on the street I have a double garage. I think you may be a little dyslexic, but dont worry you can get help for that.
And ECC who make these decisions tend to be elected
41

Elethiomel,

Edinburgh 11/02/2009 14:37:26
#28 Yeah what a bunch of hypocrites! Damn those politicians always doing exactly what they said they would do in their manifestos after they've been elected. (twit)
42

Foo,

11/02/2009 14:40:09
#39 - I'd say you fantasise about my personal circumstance more than anyone else.

So I guess that would make you...oh, just a tw@.
43

Foo,

11/02/2009 14:45:25
#39 - Honestly, you're a sad example. Sitting there doing nothing else but writing b0ll0x like 'foo=walter mitty' giggle giggle giggle. Grow a pair of balls you pathetic wuss.
44

,

11/02/2009 14:49:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
45

Foo,

11/02/2009 14:52:02
lies? What lies?
46

Foo,

11/02/2009 14:53:26
#45 And you clearly do fantasise about my personal circumstances - You never shut up about me.

If you do have a set, then they're definately big gay balls because you've clearly got a stalker/crush going on for me.
47

Niadh,

Edinburgh 11/02/2009 14:56:14
#35 Tony,
If you don't like the air quality in the city can i suggest you move out to the country? Or even better out of the country?
Your precious diesel (diesel fumes have more carcinogenic compounds in them than petrol fumes)powered buses are contributing more to air pollution than cars which are mostly only used at during evenings and weekends.

48

Dragonlord,

11/02/2009 15:34:28
6# Foo what about the lies you told about me yesterday? I notice you never answered my later posts.

As for gas guzzlers how about taking off all the buses? The traffic flowed better during the bus drivers' strike but the council refused point blank to release air quality records for the same time, I wonder why?
A large 4x4 uses the same amount of fuel as a jumbo jet when both are parked, so how will parked cars reduce emissions?
49

Dragonlord,

11/02/2009 15:35:19
Sorry for the typo that was meant to be 46
50

Jamesbuchanan66,

11/02/2009 15:45:25
cars parked = no pollution. Its not fair on the weekend drivers who get the bus during the week and want to enjoy a drive at the weekend. Its also a tax on the poor/families, not all "gas-guzzlers" are porches and range rovers.
51

tumshie heid,

11/02/2009 15:49:20
Tony, move to another country where old idiots are free to sit on benches all day long and comment on other peoples driving. (Despite not driving yourself)
Never mind its the school holidays next week so there shouldn't be any bairns with fish suppers for you to worry about.
52

Mark Renton,

Edinburgh 11/02/2009 16:08:50
COUNCILLORS ARE DUMBER THAN DIRT!! PARKED CARS DO NOT POLLUTE!! TAX THE COMMUTERS!!
53

Euan,

Edinburgh 11/02/2009 16:24:56
#35, Tony

You are a whining old lunatic.
54

Foo,

11/02/2009 16:36:14
#49 - And what lies would those be? Hmm?

That's right, none.

Oh, and I did reply to you, if you'd bothered to check it out you'd know that you twit.

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/latestnews/Salmond--spurning-thousands-of.4963154.jp

Next time get your facts straight, although, having been in the boozer since 11am what's to be expected!

You idiot liar.
55

JFW,

New Town 11/02/2009 16:47:43
I say again, even with 2 addresses in the city centre I received no letter from the council about this and even though I will benefit slightly from this move I wholeheartedly object to it as the kind of green-wash that gives folks who are really concerned about the issue a bad name. This does absolutely nothing to reduce c02 output in the city centre as it doesn't discourage anyone from driving unnecessarily, in fact it gives the opposite message to many - feel free to drive as much as you want into Edinburgh from the outer zones as we'll reduce the cost of running your smaller car that still pollutes quite a bit. What a waste of time and money. There are so many other simple things that can be done to reduce pollution in the city centre but there's obviously no chance of our transport 'experts' doing anything other than wasting time and money with no results - that's what they've proven to be adept at over the years.
56

calum,

11/02/2009 17:18:34
#35 - I take it you are the same Gorgie-Tony who said on these pages that you sit for hours on a bench outside Gorgie Parish Church watching traffic - and presumably at the same time therefore knowingly subjecting youself to the effects of airborne particulates etc.. Such a strange thing to do, to put yourself at risk deliberately when you apparently have a bad chest. What does your GP say about your bahaviour?
57

Council Insider,

Council HQ 11/02/2009 17:24:17
SHOW ME THE MONEY!
58

Plantagenet,

11/02/2009 17:36:00
Does my Rolls Royce Silver Shadow count as a gas guzzler, I think that owners of the ordinary cars should be taxed off the road allowing more room for my man to ferry me around town with having to queue at traffic lights with those wags, bookies and property developers in their pretentious four-by-fours.
59

22shifter,

edinburgh 11/02/2009 18:09:00
Another money grubbing scheme on the back of the global warming oops sorry! ahem "climate change" scare.
Man made global warming is nonsense, since 1998 global temperatures have flattened and then started to fall as part of a natural cycle governed by the sun (the big shiny thing in the sky you can hardly look at without going blind).Oh and the Co2 scare nonsense also serves as a useful distraction from real pollution issues.
60

Goat Boy,

11/02/2009 18:15:45
"We have committed to improving air quality in this city and this initiative will assist greatly in achieving this goal."

I found a new council report on the councils website and this paints a worrying picture.

“The first AQMA was declared in December 2000 on the basis that levels for nitrogen
dioxide (NO2) would not be met. Based on 2007 monitoring data, of the fourteen sites in
the central AQMA, eleven locations are predicted to fail the NO2 target
value by 2010.”

“In addition, over the two year period, levels of NO2 were shown to have deteriorated
along St John’s Road in Costorphine, leading to the declaration of a second AQMA in
December 2006.”

“The Detailed Assessment air quality report undertaken for Great Junction Street and
West Port in April 2007 identified that both these locations required to be designated as
AQMAs, for failure to comply with nitrogen dioxide objectives. The Council is now at a
stage of recommending that both these areas are covered by AQMA orders.”

Reducing emissions of carbon dioxide will not improve the air quality in Edinburgh. Carbon dioxide is a global problem not a local on. It does not matter what country it is emitted in.



61

Road Raga,

EDINBURGH 11/02/2009 18:39:35
'road tax' is a tax on ownership, not use.
This parking scheme is also a tax on ownership rather than use.
So is car insurance, it is based on the car you own, not how much you use it.
That is why this is all a total farce, it encourages people to use their cars more, not less.
62

Robert12,

11/02/2009 19:34:03
The council will make little if any money out of this as most will see a REDUCTION in their permit. It's only idiots who feel the need to drive inefficient vehicles who will be affected.

Those who claim to have not been informed must have missed the feature on the councils website (featured on the main homepage and the transportation pages) as well as in this very paper!!! JFW, you actually RESPONDED to the previous news story in October so clearly you were aware!!!

The buses do need sorted. Filthy things. I do believe I read recently they were doing something about it.

63

Dragonlord,

11/02/2009 21:48:33
55 Right nobjockey, I posted at 9.30 on the 10th and you reply the next day. If you had read my post I said on Captains road outside the pub not in it. Twonks like you should be locked away and never see another computer, because all you do is abuse people and don't like it when they reply in kind. Bury your head in the sand it won't make a blind boit of difference. No-one on here bothers what you write.
64

malcyh,

11/02/2009 21:51:08
The reson there is so much pollution is sitting in road works the council have created. Oh and all the buses spewing out diesel fumes.............rest my case.
65

Dunaskin,

Edinburgh 11/02/2009 21:55:25
I guess we're all an apathetic bunch. The council send out 60000 forms and how many folk bother to reply? So, notwithstanding the hot air on this thread, will another 'formal' consultation make any *bleep* difference. I know that my Community Council are in favour (very much so) of limiting permits to 2 per household, and with higher fees for the second permit. Anything to reduce the 'mummy's old 54 reg Golf GTI' belonging to the Jocastas and Ruperts clogging up the streets whilst the kids are at Uni....
66

is it me?,

Edinburgh 11/02/2009 22:04:11
Ignoring for a moment the tiff between Dragonlord and "nobjockey" Foo', I have a reconditioned WW2 tank .
Which I drive around my estate, removing unwanted vegetation, crushing wildlife under caterpillar tracks, billowing obnoxious gases, and not paying a penny in proletariate taxes.
Have you guessed who I is yet?
Decent,please say you'll be mine.
67

Foo,

11/02/2009 22:10:36
\64

OK, calm down. You concede I did, in fact, reply. Thanks.

OK, you're not in it, you're outside. Pfft, I don't really care.

If you don't like it, I suggest you don't dish it out!

Anyway, don't stress. I mean you no harm, it's just the comments section of a 3rd rate tabloid.

Sorry if I upset you, that's not my intention.
68

Dragonlord,

11/02/2009 22:29:41
68, It would take a lot more than a clown like you to upset me. You come on here calling every one names and calling me a liar. Then you insinuate I started it! Should I be so petty, I would have reported your posts a long time ago, and just so long as you know, no-one cares what you write, because it is the ramblings of an idiot. People put valid FACTS in front of you and all you can do is abuse them, try answering the points put to you in a civilised manner, and other would treat you in kind.
69

Euan,

Edinburgh 11/02/2009 22:59:59
#67

Donald Sutherland maybe?
70

krusty the klown,

11/02/2009 23:18:35
#69 can give you a number for a help-line if you want someone to help you get your toys back in your pram?
71

Foo,

12/02/2009 09:00:07
#69 - Hey, I think its you who is the one calling me names and insulting me.

No one cares what I write? OK, I can live with that. I'm not trying to change the world, but I am entitled to my opinion, just like you.

I was justified in calling you a liar, because, well, you told a lie.

You need to learn that if you spout BS then people will pull you up for it.

Now dry your eyes and grow up little boy.
72

Foo,

12/02/2009 09:01:45
#69

However in the interests of my Karmic well being, I forgive you.
73

Decent,

12/02/2009 10:51:21
I am interested in what you say Foo.
74

Zoolander,

Edinburgh 12/02/2009 11:41:47
I didn't received on of these 60,000 letters that were sent out even though myself and my flatmate both have parking permits.
Can somebody point me in the direction of the online survey?
75

Niadh,

Edinburgh 16/02/2009 13:18:55
#75 Zoolander,
You're not the only one who didn't get it. I know of several people who have parking permits and didn't get one of these survey/consultation letters.
I reckon that a fix is in especially as of the 60,000 apparently sent out there were less than 2,000 replies.
In situations like this the council should be made to provide proof of posting.
76

Richard Lionheart,

17/02/2009 23:25:09
#75 #76 Clearly you are not paid up members of Greenpeace or Friends of the Earth.
77

Richard Lionheart,

17/02/2009 23:32:39
Oddly enough this tax is aimed at the only cars made in Britain where the manufacturer has a research and development facility based in Britain.

Bye Bye Landrover/Jaguar. Another 20,000 British redundacies coming up Courtesy of Green Campaigners.

Too many layers of Government are allowed to invent Enviromental taxes. This has to stop.
78

w666tam,

Edinburgh 18/02/2009 19:51:28
I dont see why if you have a large engine in your car you have to pay more after all it does not mean you are doing any more Co2c than anyone else if you have a 3.0lt car or 4x4 you might not do a lot of milage the people who should be hit are the ones that do the milage after all £60 of fuel will make the same amount of Co2 no matter what car you have so you have a guy who uses £30 per weeks for fuel in his 3lt V6 4x4 and you have the sales rep in his 1.6 car but he uses £100 per week who is making the more Co2 so it does look like you are just thinking that if you have a big engine you have money not the case with me
79

doug 110,

edinburgh 10/03/2009 13:00:21
remember these 'gas guzlers' in the enviroMENTAList view point is any motor that has four wheel drive, this is rangerover 4.6 v8 and fiat panda 1litre 4x4 model. any diference? its a 4x4 aint it.

also for large families, folk that need to carry a lot of passengers or luggage etc regularly are penalised for 'gas guzler' people carriers too. to carry a heavy load surely safety should be upermost? what is safer, using a ford galaxy designed to carry weight easily and SAFELY or overloading a ford ka just because they cant afford to pay extortion fees to own the larger car for when they need it? is this enviromentaly sound either after all how many repairs/replacements are needed on damaged small cars that are carrying more than they were intended too or use a suitable (larger) car? anyone considered this?

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Would you pay more to park your car outside of Edinburgh’s city centre?
No, it costs far too much to park anyway.
Yes, but not much. The motorist is always getting stung.
Maybe, but I’d want a really nice parking space.

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.