Madrid set to become first European city to scrap low-emissions zone
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
Is there someone who actually knows this issue and can tell me what the article is omitting? I don't know what I don't know but the way this article is written makes me think there's a lot of nuance being glossed over.
It does explicitly quote NO2 statistics?
- Party A takes the council 4 years ago
- Party A implements the low emissions zone
- Party B goes into elections campaign championing a reverse of the LEZ. The quote about they saying pollution and jams are part of the city's identity is true.
- Party B does not win the election but, because of how the system works, they could take the council by joining forces with other parties (who were also against the LEZ)
- If last point indeed happens, then they will revert the LZE
Actually, it is very possible that the LZE cannot be reverted because of EU's restrictions and fines for pollution quotas. Some media that are sided to Party B and were very critical of Party A and the LZE are now changing headlines to blame EU for the LZE, in what looks like a damage control operation now that they realise the possibility of their promise being not able to be fulfilled.
Source: I live somewhere some consider is Spain and some not.
Gibraltar?
- New Poll shows rising number of Basque Country residents want to remain in Spain [1]
- Only 26.9% of Basques want independence from Spain (2017) [2]
- 23% of Basques want independence (2019) [3]
[1] https://www.euroweeklynews.com/2018/12/07/new-poll-shows-ris...
[2] https://elpais.com/politica/2017/06/23/actualidad/1498213521...
[3] https://www.lavanguardia.com/local/paisvasco/20190412/461599...
Source: I was born somewhere some consider is Spain and some not.
EDIT: Article says “City centre residents are happy with the LEZ “
Notice that the politician in question is not a candidate for mayor of the city, it's the candidate governor of the whole region around the city.
Are you speaking specifically about residents from Madrid center or just generic city center residents?
thousands of people are dying in big cities from pollution and the local government should take unpopular actions to tackle climate change. of course nobody wants to be affected in any way by climate change, they want other people to do it.
How is that a "weird definition of democracy"? That's literally what democracy means!
Yes, if a majority of people want policies which result in them dying by the thousands from pollution, then in a democratic system, that's what you have to give them. If the politicians do something highly unpopular, even though it's for the good of the society, they get voted out (assuming there's competing politicians who promise to give the people what they want). That's how democracy works. This is why democratic systems don't work very well when the populace is uneducated and stupid.
All of that happened in very low income neighborhoods that are not significantly impacted by the LEZ and outside the M30. In fact, she even got a small but meaningful vote boost from LEZ residents.
Isn't that how democracy works? I know that the system maybe could be improved but that's how the game is. In fact, the current Prime Minister started its government the same way.
For example, "previous setup was better (because A, B, C). Yes, we also had 3AM traffic jams, but we lived with it, it was not the end of the world" could get tranlated into "3AM traffic jams are good". My 2c.
"I don't like traffic jams. Nobody does. Maybe I'm weird but I don't like traffic jams. I don't like a jammed world.
But there's something that Madrid has and that few cities in the world have, which is nightlife. I've never met a city like Madrid where you can go out at 3AM and see that much life on the streets. And that life comes with traffic jams. And that's not the kind of jam that depletes your energy as opposed to the one you find yourself in when going to work and you're late to a meeting or your child is going to miss their first school hour. The one that you find yourself in when going out to dinner on weekends is not the one you hate the most.
Do I like jams? Obviously not, but they're part of Madrid's life. They were part of Madrid's life.
If Podemos [the ones who implemented the LEZ] keeps Madrid's council, there won't be jams at night but at day there will everywhere.
They're not a matter of enjoyment, but they're an identity sign of our city. They mean that the streets are alive, always.
Moreover, for women, at least for me, that I've gone out and enjoyed my city with passion, going out to have dinner and a drink and see that amount of life makes me very proud of my city.
And I believe jams are to be eradicated, of course, but that is not done by preventing neighbours' and commerces' mobility. Moreover this is being managed very sloppily."
My opinion starts here, and it is that she's mixing a lot of stuff (nightlife with shops that open only in the morning and afternoon, jams not happening inside the LEZ with ones happening outside of it, or implying that without nightly jams there's no people going out) in order to criticise the implementation of the LEZ because they defend freedom of using your car as you wish. And that brings her to having to criticise even the good aspects of it (no jams in the LEZ) with an appeal to emotions, which ends up in having to say she misses traffic jams.
Actually, she never says that previous setup was better because of anything outside that she felt the city was more crowded at night.
[1]: https://www.elconfidencial.com/espana/madrid/2019-04-24/isab...
A few things:
- The zone was set with a few months notice, creating a huge problem for many that have been quickly dismissed. Usability of prohibition is terrible. I've heard there are loopholes like a dozen persons renting a single flat and selling their permits to rich people.
- The zone includes a variety on neighborhoods, from far-left still not gentrified ones, to offices mostly, main street and luxury homes.
- There's a lot of people living outside and working inside. Most use public transportation, but not everybody can do that: salesmen, suppliers... and there are a lot of private complementary schools (things like music schools) that are going bankrupt because parents can't get their children in or out.
- Some measurements indicate that pollution has in fact raised. There were no measures to replace the forbidden traffic.
- Reverting it is dead simple. Saying otherwise is plainly dishonest, but I'm reading it a lot.
I actually believe that a measure like that is necessary sooner or later, but it needs to be done right: transport alternatives, long enough notice, well chosen exceptions and specially doing the data based homework. As it is, it's propaganda.
https://elpais.com/ccaa/2018/11/26/madrid/1543235492_515611....
The plan was to create a 4kmˆ2 ring bordering the important landmarks of the royal palace, museo del prado, buen retiro, Atocha station etc. The interior has quite a number of Metro stations and is thus quite navigable by foot.
Car-driving populism to revert a policy barely 6 months old seems to have prevailed. As can be seen from the guardian article's photo, Gran Via is a pretty major thoroughfare leading to the heart of the city, Puerta del Sol.
- You are rich and can buy a new electric/hybrid car.
- You live in the center of Madrid and are allowed to use your car.
However, if you are "poor" and work in the center of the city:
- If your car is not a low-emission vehicle, you are limited to go to work (only can by public transport).
- If you are a deliverer of packages, you'd have to buy a new car that fulfill the emission restrictions without any kind of tax-exemption from the government.
This low-emissions zone creation has been a show without any kind of planning and without consulting the citizens. i.e. there has not been any type of car renovation plan or tax exemptions that could have helped citizens with this restriction.
I understand the ecology and health-care point of view, but tell that to somebody whose work depends on reaching to the center of the city to deliver some packages (for example).
Unless the article is deliberately manipulated to send the wrong message, my above is how I'd summarise it.
Similarly to how Trump would intend to demolish Obamacare.
So there are no big lessons for the rest of the world to learn.