Good going BoJo!!!

at last someone with a bit of sense in their heads.

the increase in congestion charge was never going to reduce traffic flow and would have caused businesses a great deal of damage.

he couldnt have chosen a better time, with the economy turning down, businesses need all the help they can get, not have extra charges imposed on them!

This decision is a useful reminder that the Tories are the friends of gas guzzlers and the rich, and hate public transport, cyclists and pedestrians. Porsche would have lost their case, but by abandoning it Johnson is handing over £400,000 in costs to one of the wealthiest of all car manufacturers. London is going to be a much nastier city under a Tory mayor. Let us not forget that Johnson is also going to allow motorbikes into bus lanes (which cyclists don't want) and make pedestrians wait longer to cross the road. Boris Johnson shows the true petrolhead heart of the Tories.

A Victory for common-sense, it was never just going to hit the 4x4s etc it would have affected an awful lot of run of the mill cars. Anyways there are much easier ways of reducing congestion like restoring back sensible traffic light phasing...

A congestion charge has the primary purpose of reducing congestion. It is not, and never was, a pollution charge. And how does exempting some vehicles from the charge reduce congestion? Surely that was only an incentive to add to it?

Of course, in his blinkered travels on the road of class warfare Tom fails to recognise that the government's road tax proposals, and the fuel duty including VAT, combine to extort more from those with "gas guzzlers" than from drivers of cars with smaller or even hybrid engines.

The reality is that all drivers are lavishly subsidised by the state and don't pay the true costs of the pollution, noise and congestion they impose on society.

The good news is that oil is going up, up, up. One day all you Tories are going to have to waddle, not drive. A truly horrifying prospect, I realise.

Ken's plan to charge drivers of gas-guzzlers extra was perfectly sensible. It is absurd that anyone needs a 4X4 in London - or a Porsche. The selfish people who drive these anti-social vehicles should be hit hard by taxes. They can afford it. Tom is right. Boris Johnson is just pandering to the rich and to the planet-hating car lobby.

Tom wrote:
This decision is a useful reminder that the Tories are the friends of gas guzzlers and the rich, and hate public transport, cyclists and pedestrians. Porsche would have lost their case, but by abandoning it Johnson is handing over £400,000 in costs to one of the wealthiest of all car manufacturers. London is going to be a much nastier city under a Tory mayor. Let us not forget that Johnson is also going to allow motorbikes into bus lanes (which cyclists don't want) and make pedestrians wait longer to cross the road. Boris Johnson shows the true petrolhead heart of the Tories.

Maybe Tom you should read the reports that came out of the trial of motorbikes using bus lanes - the accident and fatality rate dropped considerably.

I think there is more risk (especially for pedestrians) with the way cyclists flout the law and highway code, when jumping red lights, pulling out without looking etc.

Maybe Mike you should check out the London Cycling Campaigh website, to see why the 'scientific' evidence is garbage. One quarter of all motor cyclists are uninsured. Motorcyclists regularly illegally enter the boxes for cyclists at road junctions. They also weave in and out of traffic at high speed. I often see motor cyclists locally driving at lunatic speeds.

Studies have shown that women cyclists obey traffic law more than male cyclists. But more women cyclists are killed on London's roads than male cyclists, often by left-turning lorries. Cyclists who jump red lights have a better survival rate, strange as this may seem.

Expecting cyclists to obey road traffic law when they are in a world where drivers don't is optimistic. It is very rare for a cyclist to kill a pedestrian. It is very common for a driver to kill a pedestrian, even when the pedestrian is on the pavement.

Tom rest assured I have seen plenty of the LCC website in recent weeks - enough to see it for the borderline fascist propaganda platform that it is !

I would love to know how you came to the figure of a quarter of motorcyclists being uninsured ?
My line of work means I have access to ANPR logs (i.e. bikes and cars that are currently active on the road) and this figure is pure fantasy. You really should check your facts before **** such ridiculous drivel.

Tom,
I think you forgot to tell us how many cyclists are uninsured: could you get back on this?
You also say that cyclists don't want M/Cs in bus lanes: can you tell us how many bus drivers and users want cyclists in them? Thanks.

Well done Boris, you have fulfilled one of your manifesto pledges and done something that people said they actually wanted done, which is obviously a new and frightening concept to Labour's bullying serial liars.

Cyclists who ride on pavements and ignore traffic lights are not only antisocial, they're also harming the environment.

Why? They turn pavements into dangerous, intimidating places to walk. And unlike cyclists, pedestrians haven't got the option of using the road.

The two solutions are to get a car if you can afford it, or to stay indoors. The first option increases car use, adding to emissions.

The second option is all that's available to most old people, mothers of small children and people with many kinds of disability. They might as well be under house arrest.

Keeping ordinary people off the pavements also encourages street crime and vandalism. It's about as antisocial as you can get.

Antisocial cycling really has become a big enough problem to undermine cycling's claims to be green or beneficial in any way, other than to the individual cyclist's leg muscles.

By the way, I support higher charges on gas-guzzlers, better subsidies for public transport and any other method of reducing road traffic in London.

But antisocial cycling has now become so widespread that cycling overall probably does more harm than good.

Today's BBC story of Rhiannon Bennett, killed by a cyclist on the pavement, has probably put car sales up a bit.

As a determined pedestrian, I've very rarely been menaced by a car on the pavement, but it happens every day with bicycles.

I don't see why cyclists think they're holier than thou have all these rights in the road. Are they insured ? No. Do they pay road tax ? No. Do they pay tax on fuel ? No.

Tom wrote:
The reality is that all drivers are lavishly subsidised by the state and don\'t pay the true costs of the pollution, noise and congestion they impose on society. The good news is that oil is going up, up, up. One day all you Tories are going to have to waddle, not drive. A truly horrifying prospect, I realise.

Well put, Tom!
We should stop subsidising 'the motorist' and the motor car economy.
Drive less, you pathetic specimens. Your car is your life, it would seem...so you vote Boris Doris. Be careful what you wish for! London traffic will grind to a halt soon. Get a life/bus pass/bike/etc.
Road traffic accidents and kids maimed and killed by cars hardly make the news; rogue cyclists do. The police should crack down on speeding, drunk and reckless driving, using a mobile while driving, etc. More speed cameres and phase traffic lights to allow pedestrians safe crossing.

Sigh.... more drivel from the cycle nazis.

Tom wrote:
This decision is a useful reminder that the Tories are the friends of gas guzzlers and the rich, and hate public transport, cyclists and pedestrians. Porsche would have lost their case, but by abandoning it Johnson is handing over £400,000 in costs to one of the wealthiest of all car manufacturers. London is going to be a much nastier city under a Tory mayor. Let us not forget that Johnson is also going to allow motorbikes into bus lanes (which cyclists don\'t want) and make pedestrians wait longer to cross the road. Boris Johnson shows the true petrolhead heart of the Tories.

Total BULL!! Get your facts right, how on earth is Porsche one of the wealthiest manufacturers. They are far from it. Your mass produced car companies that make more of the so called 'eco-friendly' vehicles are the wealthiest. The top ranking car manufacturers for profit and size are General Motors (Vauxhall), Ford, VW, Toyota, BMW, Mercedes. Porsche are no way near these companies league, they may sell expensive vehicles, but they dont rank up in the top for revenue gained.
I am glad Boris got rid of Ken's stupid charge, he made it unafordable for many local community groups to own a mini bus etc by his stupid LEZ, which would cost around £5000 to fit a catalyst to a pre 2001 vehicle. Not everyone has Ken's wage to buy newer vehicles than 2001.
Why should cyclists use bus lanes. IMO if cyclists should be allowed, then motorcyclists should too, as cyclists pose a far more danger in the bus lane than a motor cyclist for buses - as cycles do NOT have brake lights and is not easy to determine at time the unpredictable nature of some of them.
Friends of the earth are a waste of time IMO, all they want to see is everyone living in barns, smoking weed, dont wash and stink, and vegetarians.