![New Malden](/sites/www.ronmushiso.org.uk/files/styles/gallery_large/public/news-gallery/ULEZ.jpg?itok=pyHH2gsr)
No doubt many of you would have seen the Advertising Standards Authority ruling against claims made in ULEZ adverts. Adverts promoting the expansion of ULEZ made a number of claims “likely to mislead” about the pollution levels in London and inside cars, the watchdog found. We all want clean air, but the unfair ULEZ is not the answer. Susan Hall, the Conservative mayoral candidate, has pledged to “scrap the ULEZ Expansion on day one” and she has my full backing. The first finding relates to TFL radio adverts that claimed that nitrogen dioxide (NO2) levels had halved, but this was not based on measurements taken before or after the implementation but on current air quality measurements and a projected “non-ULEZ scenario.” The watchdog found not qualifying was likely to mislead them. A second upheld claim relates to a claim made in another TFL advert that most deaths related to air pollution “actually” occurred in outer London when this is also based on modelled estimates. The watchdog said this was also misleading because it did not explain the basis of the claim. The third upheld claim relates to a Greater London Authority (GLA) radio advert that stated, “According to research, one of the most polluted places in London is inside your car,” which was misleading. The ASA said they had not directly compared pollution inside a car with other locations around the city, meaning it had not substantiated the claim and was likely to mislead.