‘Medievalism’: Campaigners bristle as Hackney’s transport boss puts borough forward for road pricing pilot
Hackney’s transport boss Cllr Mete Coban (right) with Mayor Philip Glanville. Photograph: Hackney Council
Hackney’s transport boss has signalled a willingness to make the borough a pilot area for road pricing in London – as part of efforts to help reverse climate change.
Cllr Mete Coban told an audience at a recent council-backed walking and cycling conference that “affordable road user charging” is the next step to drive down traffic.
He told green transport experts that measures such as low traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs) and school streets play a huge role in cutting harmful carbon emmisions.
The Labour-controlled council wants Hackney to be “the most walking- and cycle-friendly borough in London, leading the push to build people-focused neighbourhoods with cleaner air and healthier lives”.
It pledged to do a feasability study and impact assessment of road user charging as part of its climate action plan.
Cllr Coban told the conference he hoped Hackney could be a pioneer, adding: “We have started to look at how it could work in the borough.”
He explained that on some local streets, there are no further moves that can be made to cut traffic .
Just 30 per cent of residents own a car and Town Hall experts say most traffic comes from outside the borough.
Cllr Coban said: “There are certain parts of the borough where we will have to think about road user charging.”
He added: “We are happy for Hackney to be a pilot borough and set an example for London.”
Council insiders said any scheme would have to be approved by the government, so it could take several years if it gets the green light.
In a response to Sadiq Khan’s consultation on the expansion of the capital’s ultra low emission zone (ULEZ) last year, Hackney Mayor Philip Glanville and Cllr Coban wrote that they wanted to “highlight the case for significant traffic reduction through road user charging and put Hackney forward as a lead local authority in any future pilot projects”.
They continued: “Stricter controls are also needed to tackle harmful pollution from particulates (PM2.5 and PM10) which cannot be fully addressed through reducing tailpipe emissions, but need to be linked to road traffic reduction.”
They said “the pace of change needs to be much faster” for distance-based road user charging, adding: “This is especially important in the context of the acknowledged need to reduce traffic in London by 27 per cent by the end of the decade.
“We support the use of such a scheme to achieve a ‘just transition’ to a net-zero carbon in London by 2030.”
Niall Crowley from Free Our Streets, a group of north and east London residents and business owners who campaigned against the introduction of LTNs during lockdown, branded the move “a kind of medievalism”.
He said: “It is no surprise to us that Hackney Council is actively seeking ways to introduce road user charging.
“It’s like taking another step backwards towards a kind of medievalism, with our city carved up into a patchwork of authorities who police and tax our movements.
“Hackney Council’s idea of ‘public service’ now is to block and restrict. They have nothing positive or creative to offer and road charging, like LTNs, will increase the burden on residents and local businesses.
“It seems likely that Hackney’s so-called ‘boundary roads’, where traffic is up by as much as 55 per cent since the introduction of LTNs, are to become the new toll roads, bringing in revenue for the Town Hall but only permanent misery for residents.
“Road charging gives lie to the claim that the council is interested in tackling pollution and improving our environment and our neighbourhoods.”
Green councillor Zoe Garbett said: “We see pay-as-you-drive as a much fairer model of road user charging. Greens in City Hall have been leading the conversation around this, and making sure that issues are ironed out like ensuring the schemes are privacy-friendly.
“This model of road user charging is a more equitable way for transiting to more sustainable modes of transport – but must be coupled with improvements to make cycling, walking and wheeling the most safe and pleasant option for residents.”
So, Coban wants to ‘make efforts to combat climate change’ – but has taken 5 or 6 long haul flights in the last year.
Hypocrite. Loathsome Hypocrite.
I’m surprised at the angle this article has taken. Focusing on the the views of campaigners against the proposed changes – from the headline to the paragraphs of criticism from ‘Free Our Streets’. Why is this the focus, rather than the climate emergency? There is little exploration of the compelling arguments for cutting traffic. My children are at risk of developing all sorts of illnesses as a result of air pollution due to living on one of these potential ‘toll roads’, for example. No mention of facts such as this? As you write, 70% of us are not car users in Hackney – this article does not seem representative of the needs of those living in the Borough.
Because these things don’t even scratch the surface so really, are pointless. Just look around the world at some major and emerging economies — they are pumping out harmful emissions at a scale we can barely process. A little LTN or ‘parklet’ is like a grain of sand against the problem.
I can understand your feelings of futility. But a change like this would have an immediate and direct impact on the health of Hackney residents, especially children. And ultimately if we want to have any hope of changing the course the planet is on, everyone will need to change their lifestyles – we cannot continue to pump greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Our relationship to driving non electric vehicles needs to change and change has to start somewhere.
Emily, I’d be more persuaded that these measures were genuine if the person proposing them wasn’t responsible for hundreds of tonnes of carbon emissions through flying long-haul regularly. Also, he’s the same person who endorses/supports the Edmonton incinerator.
Turns out, I’m not particularly keen on snake-oil
Mete Coban is not the boss least of all his own because without Philip Glanville’s boots to black he is nothing.
You really are clueless Emily.