The power shift towards daring Ken

Bumping up the congrestion charge to #25 for gas guzzling cars is an act of political bravado. And Mayor Livingstone will soon be gaining wider controls over London's future

Published in the Evening Standard 13 July 2006

That's the thing about politicians: give them some power and they'll use it; give them a little and they'll take more.

Ken Livingstone has just delivered another masterclass in the subject, with the congestion charge as his set text. When it was first introduced in 2003 it stood at a flat rate of #5, applicable only to central London. That sounded reasonable enough and Londoners backed it. Then, last year, the mayor raised it to #8. There were some mumblings of protest, but not much more. That was followed by expansion of the zone westward, to include Kensington and Chelsea. K & C mobilised its divisions, but to no avail.

Bit by bit the congestion charge has changed shape, costing more and extending its reach across the capital. But yesterday Ken went further than he had dared before. He unveiled a plan to increase the charge once again, though only for a specific category of car: the "gross polluters" known as Chelsea tractors. The mayor wants these cars, the Jeeps and Range Rovers, to pay a whacking #25 by 2010.

It's a move breathtaking for its political bravado. What began as a levy of just #5 will have multiplied to five times that amount for certain drivers within seven years. And unlike those previous increases, he's announced this one in advance of an election, risking the wrath of London's 4x4 vote ahead of the mayoral contest of 2008.

As if to reinforce the sheer chutzpah of the initiative, Ken's own people admit that Sport Utility Vehicles don't add to congestion in the city: one car is still just one car. So an extra tax on them is not a congestion charge at all. It is an eco-charge, a way of taxing cars not for clogging up London's roads but for emitting more than their fair share of carbon into the environment. So not only has Ken Livingstone expanded the cost and scope of the charge, he has now stretched its definition.

The politics are clear enough. Ken is gambling that for every SUV driver he will have to write off, there will be two or more Londoners who share his irritation with the monster cars. Even so, the road ahead could still be bumpy. If Ken defines the category of villainous vehicles the same way Gordon Brown did in the last Budget - as those that emit more than 226 grammes of CO2 per kilometre - he'll find himself punishing regular family cars like the Peugeot 407 and two-litre Ford Mondeo, along with the humble people carrier. They'd all pay #25. Meanwhile, owners of smaller 4x4s like the Land Rover Freelander or the Toyota Rav4 could ride into town for a mere #8. So Ken has to decide what it is exactly he wants to punish. Does he have an aesthetic problem with all 4x4's per se? If not, and his sole aim is to penalise those cars emitting too much CO2, he'd better be ready to declare war on Mondeo Man.

Let's say Ken sorts out the definitions. Will it work? If one assumes that the big polluters are very expensive, and their drivers rich, #25 might not be the disincentive Ken is hoping for. I've heard some wealthy motorists laud the congestion charge, laughingly urging Ken to raise it to #50 or even #100: "Drive the poor off the roads and leave the streets for us!" The City banker in his Porsche Cheyenne will barely notice an increase of #17.

Ken is hoping that such people are in a minority, that most will be deterred by a #25 levy - and not just deterred from driving into central London. No, Ken's ambition is that the capital's 4x4 owners eventually make a financial calculation that, given all the extra costs, the tractor is simply not worth running. One City Hall official puts it concisely: "We don't want them at all."

The result is a challenge to the two men who would be prime minister. Ken's people reckon Gordon Brown "bottled it" on Vehicle Excise Duty in the last Budget, failing to hit 4x4 owners hard enough. Meanwhile, they wonder what the cycling David Cameron will say about the #25 charge. Will he stay green and instruct London Conservatives to back it - thereby risking the ire of the Fulham 4x4 drivers who should be his natural constituency? Ken may just have found a way to do what Labour nationally has not yet managed: to flush out Cameron.

For my part, I'm prepared to give the idea a go - even though my own family car could fall foul of the new rules. The threat of climate change is so serious that drastic measures are necessary. And if this is what it takes to stop boiling our planet, then so be it.

What makes the move particularly fascinating is that today Ruth Kelly, the local government minister, will announce that the mayor is to receive a whole lot more power. The government has been reviewing the London set-up established in 2000 and decided that Ken has performed well enough to be trusted with greater muscle. Now he will have the power to approve - not just veto - planning applications, as well as greater control over adult learning and, crucially, London's rubbish.

The lesson of the congestion charge is that Ken will not let these new powers wither. He will grab them, use them and, if he can get away with it, expand them. And that is to be welcomed. After decades of movement in the other direction, finally power is shifting from the central to the local, pulled with both hands by Mayor Ken. Whitehall is watching closely, seeing how he does. If he makes London work, they'll be prepared to repeat the pattern in Manchester, Birmingham and beyond. A rebalancing of our national political system could be underway - led by a man with the gall to take what started as a traffic toll and transform it into a tool for saving the planet.

Posted on July 13, 2006 10:39 AM

---