In intersections and traffic lights around London, it isn’t hard to spot the cameras. The ULEZ, or Ultra-Low Emission Zone, is a marked zone around Greater London, wherein any non-compliant mode of transport with an internal combustion engine is due a £12.50 fee when passing through the zone.
This policy is enforced through these ULEZ cameras, which automatically recognise the license plates of passing vehicles, checking their compliance against the DVLA register and then flag the vehicle for payment.
The introduction of these devices is not incredibly recent, yet the controversy remains.
Oftentimes, it is possible to see a camera with either paint or opaque stickers covering the lens, in an effort to impede the scanning function.
Mobile ULEZ cameras, mounted above vans, are also famously or infamously known for the response of members of the public dressed in inflatable dinosaur costumes situated in front of the camera to block it with either a sign or the head of the dinosaur itself.
Yet these responses are comparatively pacifistic to that of others; several traffic lights which house these devices have been sawn off at the base, completely felling the pole itself.
This destructive method has been known to cause disruption, particularly as a quick response with a temporary traffic light is necessary to prevent an increased accident risk from lack of signalling.
Self-proclaimed ‘Blade Runners’ seem to take responsibility for these incidents and seem to be determined to push the administration for the removal of all ULEZ cameras through a variety of means.
Despite the mass protest, at the end of August 2023 the ULEZ zone expanded further into the remainder of Greater London, when previously it was considerably smaller, operating within more central Greater London.
Much of the protesting has culminated in a general sentiment of anger and offence towards Sadiq Khan, current Mayor of London.
Many will have to get rid of their non-compliant vehicles in exchange for compliant ones, which whilst are attested to statistically improve general air quality through the reduction of fume emissions, are not economically feasible for all, resulting in some who are faced with a daily charge for commuting.
So now what?
The fact that these targeted vandalisms still occur means that the controversy has not dissipated, and that a portion of residents are still outraged by the ULEZ.
Such actions, for good or bad, are a demonstration of protest, though there are no signs that the expansion nor the ULEZ as a whole will be reverting in the near future nor any attempt by the administration to engage with the citizens to initiate constructive dialogue and find a suitable compromise.
This lack of communication from both parties only increases tension and discontent, evidence of this being the escalation of vandalism and surveillance.
The future of the ULEZ is insofar uncertain, and until a compromise is reached, the so demonstrated actions of both protesters and government alike will continue.
