Knife crimes will continue to soarHe & TFL will keep asking for shedloads of money yet again, to keep transport running, which he has run into the ground whilst paying his cronies excessive salaries.Supports anarchist groups - extinction rebellion, & others.Penalise motorists by raising existing taxes or introducing new ones
Peter Yale ● 161d55 Comments
Paul James YOU are the ignorant one.Cyclists do not pay 1p, yet expect as much use, if not more, of road.Now that is ridiculous.Tell you again, cars pay car tax (whatever it’s called now) - bikes don’t Cars pay insurance, bikes don’t Cars pay fuel, congestion, pollution, parking. They can be - & are fined for any number of offences.List me anything cyclists,bikes pay??????
Peter Yale ● 153d
This is a pragnatic choice was forced upon you by the simple equation of which party has set out to kill the fewest in this Coronacitus epidemic in this country: ALL the LidDem MPs voted against the continuing lock-down and mitigation measures in parliament (which would hace kiled people), up to 80 Conservative MPs voted against the life-saving mitigation measures at any one time in Parliament (which would have killed people), including our home-grown, though thanfully deployed and responsible for somewhere else MP Joy Boden-Inboden-Damschroeder-Morissey. The choice is simple, who wants to kill fewer people in the sake of keeping the money-men rich and I end up with Labour. And at least we won't get a toll booth controlled privately funded garden bridge across the Thames as a priority, instead, a garden tunnel to Northern Island?
Victor Helm ● 153d
Soundbite Khan, that little man/boy, put more money, time & wasted effort along with all the left-wing media cartels of the UK: Sky, BBC, Channel 4, etc… The Guardian and so on… into organising a anti Trump blimp in the sky on his visit it’s no wonder people are getting sick to death with politics and their egos. The very reason I threw my television set out years ago and haven’t bought a paper in 20yrs. People are being brainwashed by all the hype, lies and control these outlets and their cronies have been raining upon us over the last 50yrs. Did I vote for Khan? NO!
c james ● 154d
Being recently reminded of Boris Johnson's pre-campaign pledges and gifts like the over 60's freedom pass just reminds me of the last Tory Council's pre-election gift of a rebate to all Ealing Council tax payers when we could see and knew that there were buildings that needed maintenance and communities that needed supporting should say it all.
Philippa Bond ● 154d
I wasn't changing the subject, it was you.I was responding to Peter Yale's ridiculously ignorant claims about funding or our streets and roads.
Paul James ● 154d
Well, bully for you Paul. You do love to change the subject when you know your arguments are feeble. The question of your overwhelming evidence still remains unanswered. Can you produce it?
Simon Hayes ● 154d
Simon, we're talking here about this ridiculous notion that somehow people that drive exclusively pay for roads and people that cycle or walk don't.I drive walk AND cycle for a start, so it's a total non starter.
Paul James ● 154d
Oh come on Paul. Grow up.Yet again you don’t answer the question just make aggressive assertions against other people. You have been asked time and again for your overwhelming evidence that the majority of residents support LTNs. But time and again you can’t provide that evidence because it doesn’t exist. So you change the subject, every time.The only elitist fantasy on display is your persistence that cyclists are some persecuted minority, bullied by ‘cars’. Really they are not. You come across as both a bully and a cry baby.
Simon Hayes ● 154d
I suspect you also subscribe to this ridiculous notion that drivers pay everything and cyclists and pedestrians pay nothing.Wanting to believe that as a driver, that YOUR roads are paid for by YOU and other people only have PERMISSION to be there from you as they DON'T PAY ANYTHING I think really sums up some of the ridiculous attitudes we see around here.It's utter nonsense though of course.Saying people that cycle don't pay for roads is as silly as saying people who walk don't.We ALL pay for the upkeep of roads through council tax and income tax.Roads are paid for out of general taxation, there is no special road fund for them, in fact there was but it was abolished when it became clear that it didn't work.What's more, if you add up the TOTAL cost of driving and supporting driving it often comes out as a COST to society. Several studies have shown investment in cycling and walking pays BACK, and investment in driving just means more costs.I'm sure what's I've said here won't change a thing in your minds, but that just shows how entrenched you are in the silly incorrect elitist fantasy that your driving pays for itself and pays for everything else.
Paul James ● 154d
From someone who drives as & when you have no clue.Cyclists pay not a penny & as listed before ,motorists are hit every which way
Peter Yale ● 155d
Don’t be an idiot Paul. You know full well that every survey, Mail in to the council and the Commonplace platform overwhelmingly reject the LTNs. As they are the only methods of recording opinions it’s obvious that the majority opinion is against the schemes. You’ve been told that umpteen tunes by plenty of people on this forum and elsewhere.You just can’t accept that you are wrong, can you?
Simon Hayes ● 155d
It's very interesting that, every time I have invited on here (about 6 times now I recall), for Local Labour Voters to justify Labour controlled LBE's antics, there's been a deathly silence. ?
Rosco White ● 155d
Still waiting for your ‘overwhelming evidence’ Paul.You have nothing whatsoever to support anything you like to claim. Like most of your sort you confuse your opinion with fact.So where is your overwhelming evidence? You’ve had weeks to produce it. Or does it just not exist?
Simon Hayes ● 155d
The people voted overwhelmingly last time for a Labour Council, so who's this coalition going to be ? Seems like you're just whistling Dixie.
David Burke ● 155d
Except it doesn't.I think the only power the assembly has over the mayor is to reject the budget, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't have the seats to do that, even though they've joined together.
Paul James ● 155d
An interesting development and perhaps a model for the future (particularly in Ealing where some form of coalition may be needed to grasp power from Labour).It stops Khan and his teams from 'marking their own homework' and effectively being able to get away without full scrutiny.
N V Brooks ● 155d
>Actually Humans now emit more CO2 than a modern lean burn1.1.litre petrol engine and methane.Somebody needs to read up on the CO2 cycle...
Paul James ● 155d
>Mr White is exactly right, cyclists are afforded the same rights, if not more than motor vehicles, yet pay not 1 pennyAbsolute and utter bunkum. why do you write such utter nonsense :D :D :D
Paul James ● 155d
The Conservatives now dominate City Hall’s committees - which hold Sadiq Khan to account - after an extraordinary deal was done with the Greens and Lib Dems. Two Tories have also been elected to the leadership posts on the London Assembly.The three political parties said they tried to secure a four party agreement for chairing committees based around the proportion of seats each group has on the London Assembly.Their plan would have allowed Labour to chair five committees, the Conservatives four, Greens one and the Lib Dems one in the first year of this administration. The three parties claim that Labour walked away from an agreement “at the eleventh hour” and refused to chair any committees.
peter king ● 155d
Politicians of different hues often work together. https://resource.co/article/do-binmen-dream-electric-vehicles
Philippa Bond ● 155d
Just been reading about the Liberals, Greens and Tories grouping together to restrict Labour's powers on the London Assembly. Seems like Khan's people wanted to run everything but hadn't realised that the three parties combined could stop their excesses. Thank you God!
peter king ● 156d
Also crime has risen since the government slashed the metropolitan police budget so massively. remember theresa may saying that police numbers have no effect on crime. a complete lie.
Peter Chadburn ● 156d
Actually Humans now emit more CO2 than a modern lean burn1.1.litre petrol engine and methane.A car carrying 4 people emits less than 1 cyclist or 2 people walking at a brisk pace.It's simply not as simple as being made out. We only live in cities because of the work and living that can be made. We live in an old and long established city and we have policies to encourage overdensification.That is the single biggest cause of pollution and a long list of other damaging environmental factors as well as the mental and well being and quality of life for people.It is barely being addressed rather than a tirade of half baked stuff that suits those who are profiting from the issues.A far from easy choice to tackle the real issues, suicidal from a political point of view. A very tough and contentious issue which could very easily be turned into something nasty.But also exposes the easy way in which people get taken in by those who are doing rather nicely out of the scaremongering and gerrymandering of reality.
Raymond Havelock ● 157d
I did read it, it got derailed halfway through into yet another cycling debate. The initial concerns were about knife crime (Tory police cuts), TFL's budget (caused by COVID, Khan has reduced the debt Johnson left) and Khan's support for anarchists (tenuous in the extreme). Cycling only became an issue much, much later.
Kevin Wilson ● 157d
"I'm not sure how this even got onto the topic of cycling." That's because you did not bother to read the thread.
Philippa Bond ● 157d
I'm not sure how this even got onto the topic of cycling. The original post was just blaming Khan for things that he isn't even responsible for. Cycling not being one of them. It's like the equivalent of Godwin's Law - it always comes back to cycling eventually.
Kevin Wilson ● 157d
Phillipa, you really do bang on about a lot of nonsense. Cycling is a minority pastime. Even countries with a far stronger cycling culture than the UK have minuscule proportions of journeys. Just 4 percent in France and a measly 1.3 percent in Spain.There are huge sections of the population of London who will never contemplate cycling as an option, regardless of any ‘incentive’ from government, local or national.And the personal health benefits of cycling are overstated. To burn off any reasonable number of calories you’d need to do a lot more than a mile or two of gentle, local cycling. Then not refuel with pizza and chips.
Simon Hayes ● 157d
I think you can park about 6 bikes in the space of one car.Cycles do not cause the emissions and pollution that Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) cars, vans and lorries do.Fossil fuels are on the way out as fast as Govts can get them out and that's why Govts have put dates when petrol and diesel car sales will end. Fossil fuel companies after pretending fossil fuels were causing no damage at last are divesting and investing in alternative energy. There are fuel stations where you can only charge electric vehicles.Heavier vehicles are causing more damage to the roads causing potholes and to the pavements when they are driven over them. This is dangerous for pedestrians. It is illegal in London to park on the pavement unless the pavement is especially marked for parking.Over-indulgence in instant gratification is creating unnecessary online deliveries and killing the high streets.Insurance - a good idea for everyone - you can get this easily for cycles through the London Cycling Campaign - which is a what a lot of cyclists do.With a cycle you can ride straight from the rail or tube station all the way home.With a cycle you can ride direct to school and back.You can get yourself fined for riding on the pavement and I'm sure there are other offences eg riding without lights.Many motor vehicles travel with only one person in them and so take up a lot of road.Too many motorists on the roads push cyclists especially not very confident ones onto the pavements - causing stress to pedestrians. Cyclists need better and safer space.Many cyclists are also motorists so are paying Vehicle Excise Duty.Cyclists have to keep their cycles in good repair or they won't work and they may not be able to get any free repairs or do them themselves and may have to pay for spare parts.Cycles don't have to be two-wheeled - you can have three-wheelers or more if you are unsteady on two.There are more motorists who seem to still have the most trouble driving at 20mph in 20mph zones making it more dangerous for everyone else. Just imagine what it would be like if we each had an enormous car to travel in and never shared.Aren't all of us paying all the taxes that we should be? If we are not then we are probably not paying our fair share for the other things like roads either.
Philippa Bond ● 158d
These tired arguments have been trotted out over and over again on social media. They contribute nothing to the debate on public transport.Roads are a necessary part of an industrialised society. They would exist even if there was no such thing as a private car. They are a public good we all pay for through taxation - the goods and services will generally arrive by road. Motorists already make a substantial contribution to the cost through the extra taxes on fuel.Should motorists pay more? Well maybe. We clearly do need to reduce private car but improving public transport is the only way to take enough cars off the road to make a transformative difference. However, thus far so many of the extra costs that have been piled on motorist are regressive in that they are flat fee charges e.g. increased parking cost, the congestion charge, arbitrary PCNs for minor offences and higher permit charges. As a proportion of income these charges are very significant for a large proportion of the workforce who need a car for work or to get to work. The only way increasing these charges will reduce car use is by making people's employment economically unviable. A policy of reducing car use which targets those on lower incomes is fundamentally unjust.An increase in people cycling has a wide range of benefits for everyone including reduced emissions and an increase in the general health of the population. Quite rightly, all main political parties want to encourage its use and none of them are considering restrictions on cycling such as licensing, insurance requirements or any other measures that would prevent anyone from getting on a bike.
Mark Evans ● 158d
Wih evermore crowded roads, some form of third party insurance is becoming essential.
Mark Law ● 158d
Fair amount for driving??Insurance, fuel, MOT, parking (cpz, park & pay etc)Extra taxes added , congestion, pollution, ulez.PCNsMr White is exactly right, cyclists are afforded the same rights, if not more than motor vehicles, yet pay not 1 penny
Peter Yale ● 159d
How about people paying a fair amount (instead of nothing) for covering the cost of cycling? 😆Maybe at least something like compulsory insurance perhaps? 😉
Rosco White ● 159d
>will look to penalise motorists financiallyDid you mean have people pay a fair amount for covering the cost of driving?
Paul James ● 159d
Gotta agree with you Mr Havelock.And " ...... a bit more effort and organisation," is something that the Local Conservatives have shown for years that they're totally incapable of.I have no idea what's going on with the CONs locally but they SO obviously lack any form of Leadership whatsoever.
Rosco White ● 159d
Tories have not put up good candidates or consistent out of office activity for far too long.Some of the parliamentary and GLA candidates are not ever going to be electable. No strong track record, local links or long standing and visible campaigning on things.Others are barely much better except for minority groups and those funded via larger bodies as a pressure force.It's the same old story, pandering to minorities and contempt for mainstream populace who pay for most of everything. Nothing changes really.
Raymond Havelock ● 159d
The claim was made earlier that the Conservatives won the vote in the Ealing & Hillingdon constituency — this is incorrect they lost by over 6,000 votes. While this is a smaller losing margin that for the constituency member they are not a like for like comparison.
With the, as yet unconfirmed, events of last night it looks like the Labour party were seriously spooked by the vote. From what I could see no clear pattern emerged and it is hard to reach any conclusions other than, with a bit more effort and organisation, the Tories could have pulled off a shock win.
Both parties seem to be drawing lessons from Thursday's vote across the country from newspaper headlines rather than looking at the actual numbers which present a very complex and interesting picture of the state of mind of the UK public at the moment.
Gordon Southwell ● 159d
Oh yes, there's quite a few Ward Councillors who are very, and definitely, unemployable.Makes you wonder why so many STILL don't do their job?!Wonder if it's the warm comfort of knowing you'll still get voted back in by The Lemmings, regardless?
Rosco White ● 160d
Actually, if you look at the current batch of Conservative councillors they all have proper jobs so don't need to resort to the 'greasy pole'. Unlike certain councillors who would probably be unemployable in the real world.
N V Brooks ● 160d
"The worst are those with political aspirations beyond and see it as a career stepping stone."And have two or more careers on the go at the same time?BellEnd?Fick Mik Sabiers?Bash'em Mahfouz?Mainly afflicts the Local Labour Party it seems, although I'm sure there's one or more Local Conservatives might fit the bill?
Rosco White ● 160d
The best local councillors have always been genuine local people and with a strong sense of duty to the district they liv within and the people.The worst are those with political aspirations beyond and see it as a career stepping stone. Not always but more often than not.The really good potential candidates - well they never become candidates they stay out of politics altogether and do other things in communities.
Raymond Havelock ● 160d
I admired Jason Stacey, at least he managed to keep Ealing's streets swept. I was going to ask, 'What ever happened to him?'But a quick Google reveals all, he's joined the Village People . . er, I mean the YMCA. >>> https://uk.linkedin.com/in/jason-stacey-887aa3a6
Tony Heath ● 160d
From what I am told from friends who have been active in the party at a local level there are two factions - one that sees council policy as a grubby but necessary step on the ladder to rise through the party hierarchy whereas on the other hand there are those that believe constituency work matters and believe that public service is an end in itself and don't have further political ambitions other than to serve residents.
Mark Evans ● 161d
Local Conservatives seem V lazy and have zero profile, they don't deserve to win anything.I am sure there are (and there certainly have been) some V hardworking Local CON members, but in the main the entire Local Conservative Party is invisible, and they don't appear at all bothered by that.It's all been said before ad nauseum, Local Councils are not the place to play Party Politics, I imagine we might be able to pin our hopes on the new local Independent Party, or whatever they're called.If they're truly non political they might have have a VERY good chance of kicking BellEnd & Co into touch next year.We live in hope.Meanwhile, another term of The Twerp as Mayor of London.
Rosco White ● 161d
Interesting if you are right if Ealing and Hillingdon voted for Bailey. I thought these numbers were not released until much later on. If correct it does confirm the notion that the Tories missed an open goal in the local constituency.
Mark Evans ● 161d
The only good news is that the little cretin has three years left now to finish off the job. The bad news is that there is no limit to how long we have to put up with him. I think I saw that the good folk of Ealing/Hillingdon rejected him in voting for Bailey. Seemingly you can't fool all of the people all of the time, just some of them.
peter king ● 161d
Such a shame that Rory chap pulled out. (Even I've managed to forget his surname!)- How wise he is to get out of British Politics !But he was the only original candidate that could have made a serious challenge.The delight and relief at City Hall when he dropped out underlined that last year.A range of poor and insignificant and unproven candidates.
Raymond Havelock ● 161d
Just a few points.
Every mass transit system in the world is subsidised. The idea that Sadiq Khan is failing by needing financial support to continue running London's transport is a nonsense.
I'm not sue electing a Conservative mayor have would reduced excessive payments to cronies if central government is anything to go by
It was the Department for Transport that insisted, against Sadiq Khan's wishes, that the Congestion Charge be raised and reintroduced more quickly. Therefore we probably need to assume that any alternative administration will look to penalise motorists financially
Gordon Southwell ● 161d