3. Some Background

Most of you will already have full information on the London project, but for those who don't, or may wish to do a bit of homework on the subject, here are a handful of reference points that may help. You will find balanced coverage, and less balanced. But you'll figure out all that for yourselves. ;-)

• Official Congestion Charge London Webpage
  

• Congestion Charging Newsfeed
  

• Latest News(Press articles from last month.)
  

• Overview article (Wikipedia)

• Short piece from Singapore with origins

• Cautiously positive article from The Economist

• Strong negative views from Keep London Free

• Google mega-search

• Discussion groups discuss (Views from all sides)

• Negative views (mostly)

• Positive views (mostly)

Back to top

4. The Views: Contrasting positions

Nobody ever said that transport in cities was supposed to be a simple matter. Proof of that, if indeed it is needed, can be found in the wide range of reactions that we have received since launching this 'international peer support' campaign to bring attention to one idea that in our view may have its place in the still all-too-thin list of practical schemes to improve mobility and life quality in our cities. And while the reaction is on the order of 5:1 in favor of the nomination, there are those other voices. Here is a quick anonymous sample to give you a feel for the terrain.

Example 1: Something bold, simple and brave
I would be very happy to add my name to the nomination of Ken Livingston for the WTN 2004 - World Technology Award for Environment. Ken Livingstone has been a leader in doing something bold, simple and brave to limit car use in a one of the world's major cities. The scheme is easy to understand and has achieved its objective of reducing car use. As a result, London is a healthier and pleasanter place to live and work. (Moreover…) I think the approach is worthy of emulation not only by many cities in Europe but by many many cities in the third world that stand exposed to: widespread damage through deadly impact of air pollution on health, damage and destruction to the fabric of the city by auto vehicles, destruction of natural and man made heritage by the never ending appetite of roads and parking spaces, and the tendency to substitute the vibrant and unique personality of the city by mono-culture of urban design, devoid of life and spirit. Many cities in India are ripe for initiatives to reign in the personal auto vehicles that are growing at a cancerous pace. We certainly would benefit from any ripple effect the award may generate.

Example 2: Environmental vandal of the year award
I don't support any nomination at all for Ken (apart from environmental vandal of the year award). His road schemes/bridges are appalling and show that he does not understand London/transport or the needs of ordinary citizens. It's not a case of warts, more a case of systemic physiological failure. It would be a huge mistake to encourage this man to pursue yet more dinosaur road building in a very fine city. He also supports massive airport expansion and his overall contribution (apart from wrecking people's lives in Hounslow, Hillingdon, Greenwich and Thamesmead...only 500,000 people) will be a massive increase in greenhouse gases and climate change risks but who cares about the planet, species or poor people in Bangladesh as long as Ken's friends can drive to a wine bar and fly to their holiday home in Spain. That's what really matters.

And if that is not enough for you, please click here for the latest results from the group. (With apologies for those awful little graphics.)

5. The point of it all

Here is the bottom line as we see it:

• We are not claiming that this is the best way for London to solve all its problems of mobility and life quality. Nor are we meaning to imply that we think that the mayor is doing everything right in this domain. But if we scratch the issues and the debate we can learn two valuable lessons in being politically effective in an imperfect world.
  1. The London/Livingstone project provides us an important demonstration of a more radical approach to which virtually all of our larger cities should at the very least be giving their very closest attention. Experience has shown that if there is not clear recognizable example (and that means not at the other end of the globe, and in a recognizable socio-economic-political context), then the message simply will not get through. Now we have such an example -- and among the most important explanations for it is that one man put his career on the line to make it work. Hmm.

  2. The second lesson can be seen in this process which is taking place here: a lesson in political maturity for us all and with it the importance of open, vigorous and civilized democratic debate. (I leave it to you to check out the views and positions that appear here to sort out that one for yourselves.)

• What was it that Bismarck famously said when struggling with his rounds of important social reforms in the nexus of Germany: something along the lines of "Politics is the art of the possible". So, how can we use this thought in the present circumstances to deal with what, from a perspective of sustainability and social justice, is a legitimate conundrum.
  1. We feel strongly that the Livingstone/London road pricing project is a significant concrete advance in the still-poor armory of weapons in the was on unsustainable transport in our cities. So it is important that this accomplishment be given maximum visibility.

  2. By the same token we have a situation in which the same person, the same team that have made this important path-breaking advance, are, apparently in error according to the most thoughtful and best informed of our colleagues, giving serious consideration to a number of transport measures that are entirely contrary to the concept of sustainable development as we understand it.

Proposed resolution of conflict: (1) We do all that we can to ensure that the Mayor make sit at least among the five finalists, at which time (2) we pat the good mayor kindly and publicly on the back for the important contribution he has made with this innovation -- but at the same time (3) we add to our public commendation, a very serious reserve and open international commentary about the rest. What form might this most efficiently take (because that's our only concern here, getting this message across)? Well, I propose we leave this to the group to work out how best to proceed.

So if you go to the Nomination/Comments form here, you will see that ample space has been provided for you to come in with your views and suggestions as to how to handle this. We all look forward to seeing how this exercise in open brainstorming and international collaboration works out. One thing we know for sure: we want to get out of this for the sustainability agenda, both for the world and for the citizens of his city. With that, I leave the floor to you.

Back to top