Glasgow led the way in Scotland when it introduced its Low Emissions Zone in June last year. Dundee, Edinburgh and Aberdeen will follow soon.
It has proved to be highly contentious. Writing in The Herald yesterday, Donald MacLeod, a driving force of the city’s celebrated nightclub culture, called for a change to the restrictions to boost the "struggling" night-time economy.
Today, one of our readers argues that cutting back the LEZ hours is not the answer to Glasgow’s problems.
Patricia Ford of Glasgow writes:
"I have struggled to find anything positive in Donald MacLeod's article concerning his opposition to the LEZ, parking charges for private vehicles and improved conditions for people to walk and cycle in the City of Glasgow. He quotes a number of influential people who, he claims, support his views, but how many of them live in the city and are eligible to vote for our city councillors?
Mr MacLeod apparently wants people with old cars, spluttering petrol and diesel fumes, to drive into the city, leave their cars on our busy streets and go off to enjoy themselves without contributing to the public coffers.
Sign up for our Letter of the Day newsletter
Many of us who do live in the city have campaigned for cleaner air, better facilities for people who walk and cycle, for an improved bus service (which, at long last, we should soon be getting) and, I am sure, many of us want the Subway to run beyond 6pm on a Sunday.
With a good 24-hour bus service, a Subway that runs when people want to travel, with ScotRail performing well and with the addition of more park and ride facilities on the outskirts of the city, the majority of people who live on the outskirts will be able to access the city without scrimping and saving to buy an old second-hand car. This leaves plenty of room in our car parks for those people who need, rather than want, to use a car.
This - improving conditions for us all - I suggest, is where Mr MacLeod and his ilk should be spending their energy, rather than encouraging people to endure the frustrations of sitting in traffic jams before going to the pub or the cinema."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.Â
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.Â
That is invaluable.Â
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel