Unfair Ulez

Sir: I hope Ross Clark’s article (‘Highway robbery’, 22 July) will open people’s eyes to the unfair disadvantage Sadiq Khan has been imposing on those on lower and middle incomes in London. As a jobbing gardener who relies on the use of a van, I had just paid off the lease, with the intention of keeping the vehicle until I retired, when I became a victim of the first expansion of the Ulez zone in 2021. I live 200 metres within the boundary: driving that 200 metres in and out to go to work costs me £12.50 a day.

Ulez is a regressive tax that falls particularly hard on the elderly and disabled, as there is no exemption for Blue Badge holders (Labour GLA members voted down a proposed amendment by the Conservative group to allow an exemption). If people in these groups fail to qualify for the higher rate of disability allowance, they are more likely to depend on older vehicles.

It is shameful that Labour has been responsible for this tax, which seems part of a drive to make mobility the privilege of the rich once again. That high-pitched whine you can hear is the sound of my late father and his fellow lifelong Labour activists and supporters spinning in their graves.

Bob O’Dwyer

London SW4

Breakdown

Sir: Ross Clark writes that ‘As reality has set in, it has become clear there is a limited market for [electric] cars’. This despite Ulez and similar schemes across Britain. We all know about the limits to recharging infrastructure and battery life but a point that hasn’t been made as much is what happens when they break down. Roadside assistance can’t get them back on the road. Worse, they are immobilised when the electrics malfunction, and cannot be pushed out of the way. The result is that they remain blocking the traffic until the emergency services show up. I returned mine to the secondhand dealership after three weeks.

Chloe Green

London E9

Who banks there?

Sir: You correctly state that the public has the right to know what is happening within Coutts and NatWest (‘Held to account’, 22 July). The key question both banks need to address is whether they still have pro-Kremlin oligarch account holders and, if so, why they have failed to close their accounts.

Trevor Lyttleton

London NW11

Defence of LNER

Sir: Mary Wakefield (‘There is no plan!’) and Martin Vander Weyer (Any other business, both 22 July) isolate LNER for criticism. I travel fairly frequently from Newark to London and had to do so last Thursday, a strike day. LNER gave me a week’s notice of a special timetable. I booked through their app, a simple process, and received the tickets on my phone at once. In uncomfortable anticipation I went along to the station. The train arrived two minutes early and was surprisingly empty. The seats (standard class) are acceptable, and all was well cleaned. The staff were polite and helpful and happy to engage in a little light banter about the strike. We were two minutes ahead of schedule at King’s Cross. I am sorry that Ms Wakefield and her fellow passengers were poorly treated at Thirsk. Apart from the occasional train delayed by theft of cables or an attempted suicide, I have generally experienced excellent service from LNER. Please allow the alternative view to balance your correspondents’ experiences.

Tom Fremantle

Newark, Notts

A way out

Sir: Douglas Murray is correct to warn of the ‘slippery slope’ that can follow the introduction of assisted dying laws for patients with terminal diseases (‘Canada’s lovely, liberal solution’, 22 July). However, this is not an inevitable consequence and should be avoidable with good legislation. It is also important to remember that despite the invaluable work of hospices and their outreach methods, palliative/terminal care is not as widely available in the UK as would be ideal. This is one of the many tragedies of the NHS. Over-concerns about the ‘slippery slope’ denies choice to patients with full capacity suffering from, for example, intractable pain or paralysis from bone metastases, or the distressing breathlessness of end-stage pulmonary fibrosis or the indignities of terminal motor neurone disease and some other neurodegenerative diseases. With the true compassion of a mature society, a safe and sustainable solution, without slip, should be the goal.

J. Meirion Thomas, FRCP, FRCS

London SW3

Right to Buy

Sir: A letter (22 July) in response to Lionel Shriver offers various reasons for and solutions to the current housing shortage. From my working life in social housing, I now believe that the introduction of Right to Buy was the main problem for both social and affordable housing availability. It removed the best of the stock, often in desirable areas with the highest need, and ridiculously generous discounts were given. The money made from the scheme should have been used to provide more council housing but was not. I am glad that in most areas it is back to being a discretionary policy. If only local authorities and housing associations had been allowed to offer mixed-tenure housing from the start, as well as offering a percentage for sale. That in turn would have been a better source of cross-subsidy.

Ian Elliott

Belfast

Made in Dagenham

Sir: In his review of Different Times: A History of British Comedy (Books, 22 July), Joel Morris mentions that Dudley Moore’s Dagenham roots were often overlooked. But so too were those of George Carey, the former archbishop of Canterbury, and of Sandie Shaw, who won Eurovision in 1967 with ‘Puppet on a String’.

Peter Inson

East Mersea, Essex

Get 10 issues for just $10

Subscribe to The Spectator Australia today for the next 10 magazine issues, plus full online access, for just $10.

SUBSCRIBE 10 issues for $10 REGISTER 3 articles a month

Already a subscriber? Log in