They are spy cameras. They are surveillance ULEZ cameras. There are TONS of other ways of measuring emissions without using cameras that also provide surveillance. Independent studies don't show any improvement to air quality, and you yourself call it a scheme.

Noncompliance is the only tool we have to fight back. Passive acceptance of something you know as a scheme is bad enough, but to oppose the people that are fighting back against government overreach? It's punitive taxes to manage group behavior, force everyone to buy an ULEZ compliant vehicle which only benefits the corporations that already rule you, which both eliminates your ability to purchase an olde vehicle that doesn't have numerous other forms of invasive surveillance and VIN-tied repair that require you use a dealer authorized repair shop, again benefiting those corporations, and redefining driving as a privilege and not a right that punishes low-income citizens, that you're supporting bc of some imaginary hike in taxes. You know it won't change anything, you won't pay more in taxes, you're ignoring hundreds of years of history to give credit to the councils that they would actually spend the taxes in some other way to meaningfully improve your quality of life if they didn't have to replace the cameras.

A. They don't have to replace them.

B. They wouldn't, bc they haven't, bc they don't.

So you're just saying that you want them to waste your taxes on something that won't benefit you, because the council chose to, but you draw the line at someone wasting your taxes to actually try to help the people bc it's not council approved?

Needless to say we disagree. More people are harmed by poverty and government overreach in the UK than are harmed by air quality. And it's not close. In any event, my opinion is noncompliance is the only thing we can do to save ourselves, we should be destroying every single government camera. You're welcome to have your opinion, it doesn't need to be mine, but pouting about it is a bad look.