Connect with us

Published

on

A review has been ordered by Rishi Sunak of divisive low traffic neighbourhoods.

The prime minister’s move comes as green policies and the path to net zero promise to be a key battleground in the run up to the next general election.

The Tories narrowly held Boris Johnson’s former seat after tapping into local concerns about the expansion of London’s ultra-low emissions zone (ULEZ) by the city’s Labour mayor Sadiq Khan.

Read more:
The Conservatives’ green policies – and what could be scrapped

But nature campaigners have warned they will “not stand by” while politicians use the environment as “a political football”.

Mr Sunak is due to meet energy bosses this week to set out his plans for the UK’s fossil fuels and green industries.

So what are low traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs) and why are they controversial?

More on Net Zero

Designed to encourage cycling and walking by limiting driving in side roads, the rollout of LTNs was paved by the government in 2020 with £225m in funding. They were implemented in areas from spring of that year.

Schemes include segregated cycle lanes, wider pavements and closing roads to motor traffic.

Read more:
LTNs are about ‘taking back control’ from Whitehall
Starmer told to ‘get off the fence’ and challenge Sadiq Khan on ULEZ

The key aim is to reduce air pollution, noise nuisance and traffic accidents by getting people out of their cars and tackling rat-running, where people use residential streets as short cuts.

How do they work?

LTNs use barriers, bollards, road signs, and planters to restrict cars, vans, and other vehicles, while allowing pedestrians and cyclists through.

How many are there?

There is no official public tally but it has previously been reported there are around 300 schemes already running or planned across the country, including London, Bristol, Oxford and Newcastle.

Other cities such as Manchester, Birmingham and Sheffield have also introduced LTNs.

So LTNs work and are popular?

It depends who you talk to with the success of schemes disputed.

Supporters argue the measures have cut noise and air pollution, encouraged people to opt for more healthy and environmentally friendly types of travel, strengthened communities and helped local businesses with the extra footfall.

But critics believe while they may have improved areas where they are located, they push the problems elsewhere.

This includes creating congestion and causing longer journeys, generating more polluting emissions.

Many LTNs are also not recognised by satnav leading to traffic snarl-ups.

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

Although some claim LTNs make it easier for emergency services to reach their destination, others argue they do the exact opposite, hindering the response to 999 calls as vehicles cannot get through.

It is not just practical considerations, Conservative MP Nick Fletcher has previously suggested the traffic control measures were part of an “international socialist concept” which would take away personal liberties.

Some people have been so infuriated that they have vandalised LTN measures such as setting fire to planters blocking roads.

What about ULEZ?

The Ultra Low Emission Zone – more commonly known as ULEZ – aims to reduce air pollution in London and other big cities by charging heavy polluting vehicles to drive on central roads.

Mr Khan wants to expand the zone to the borders of the capital, but he’s been met with fierce opposition.

Even Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has called on his colleague to “reflect” on his decision in the wake of the party’s defeat at the Uxbridge and South Ruislip by-election.

Continue Reading

Politics

EU sanctions crypto entities for election interference, disinformation

Published

on

By

EU sanctions crypto entities for election interference, disinformation

EU sanctions crypto entities for election interference, disinformation

The EU has sanctioned multiple entities for using cryptocurrencies to evade restrictions, channel funds, and propagate pro‑Russian disinformation and election interference.

Continue Reading

Politics

Starmer says former Tory ministers have ‘serious questions to answer’ over Afghan data breach

Published

on

By

Starmer says former Tory ministers have 'serious questions to answer' over Afghan data breach

Sir Keir Starmer has said former Tory ministers have “serious questions to answer” about how the names of Afghans who worked with UK forces were exposed.

Nearly 7,000 Afghan nationals are being relocated to the UK after their names were accidentally sent in an email in February 2022, when Boris Johnson was prime minister, but the leak was only discovered by the British military in August 2023, when Rishi Sunak was PM.

A super-injunction, preventing the reporting of the mistake, was imposed that year in an attempt to prevent the Taliban from finding out about the leak.

The Conservative government at the time then started transporting thousands of Afghans to the UK in secret as they were in danger.

On Tuesday, the injunction was lifted.

Politics latest: Starmer hammered over unexpected inflation rise

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Victim of Afghan data breach speaks to Sky

Kicking off Prime Minister’s Questions, Sir Keir said: “Ministers who served under the party opposite have serious questions to answer about how this was ever allowed to happen.

“The chair of the defence committee has indicated that he intends to hold further inquiries.

“I welcome that and hope that those who are in office at the time will welcome that scrutiny.”

The data breach saw a defence official accidentally release details of almost 19,000 people seeking to flee Afghanistan after the return of the Taliban.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch avoided mentioning the data breach, but Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey said it was “shocking” how it had been kept secret for three years.

Sir Ed said the prime minister will have the Lib Dems’ support if he decides to pursue a public inquiry.

Mr Healey’s Tory predecessor, Sir Ben Wallace, said he makes “no apology” for applying for the initial four-month injunction and insisted it was “not a cover-up”.

The scheme, which had been kept under wraps until yesterday, has so far cost hundreds of millions of pounds.

However, the total cost to the taxpayer of existing schemes to assist Afghans who are deemed eligible for British support, as well as the additional cost from the breach, will come to at least £6bn.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Afghans being relocated after data breach

Earlier, Defence Secretary John Healey told Sky News he is “deeply uncomfortable” with the government using a super-injunction to keep the massive data breach hidden.

He said: “I’m really deeply uncomfortable with the idea that a government applies for a super-injunction.

“If there are any [other] super-injunctions in place, I just have to tell you – I don’t know about them. I haven’t been read into them.

“The important thing here now is that we’ve closed the scheme.”

Mr Healey was informed of the breach while in opposition, and earlier this year he commissioned a review that led to the injunction being lifted.

He said “accountability starts now” and added Labour had to deal with the risks, court papers, intelligence assessments and different schemes when they came to power last summer before they could lift the injunction.

Continue Reading

Politics

CLARITY Act isn’t perfect, but it’s the bill US Congress must pass this summer

Published

on

By

CLARITY Act isn’t perfect, but it’s the bill US Congress must pass this summer

CLARITY Act isn’t perfect, but it’s the bill US Congress must pass this summer

The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act isn’t perfect, but Congress should pass it this summer to establish the US as the global leader in digital asset regulation.

Continue Reading

Trending