Friend Or Defoe said:

valleynick66 said:

Friend Or Defoe said:

valleynick66 said:

Khan wont only be judged on ULEZ come the mayoral elections. Knife crime is a sad statistic that will also harm his chances of re-election.

But back to ULEZ - when will we see some stats on the number of cars that are non compliant today versus pre ULEZ ? My fear is that its going to be cash negative with the huge expense on infrastructure at a time when we can least afford it. I think the 9/10 cars claim thing may prove his undoing.

They claimed knife crime would cost him the last election, but as the MET had its funding cut by central government he won and was able to try and tackle pollution and child hunger.

We are digressing but what I'm saying is both ULEZ and Knife Crime are sticks to beat him with at the time of the next mayoral election in all likelihood.

I am not sure he can turn around the 'perception' of ULEZ quickly enough.

But I ask again why no stats at this time ? The PR machine needs no doubt to interpret them in such a way it can be sold as a positive change but why the apparent delay when we know they would be available immediately if they chose to release them?

There's a stat posted on this thread claiming most Londoners are for ULEZ. I don't know how many cars are now compliant. 

I wasn't suggesting you knew the stats rather questioning why they have not been released by TFL yet.

O-Randy-Hunt said:

Rothko said:

Communities that live in LTNs tend to quiet like them, less traffic, safer places for kids to play, no rat runs for Uber drivers using Waze. it's not some conspiracy to make the air worse. 

Maybe some do like turning their street into a cul de sac while still being able to drive down other people's streets. Only 75% of the Islington residents in this consultation weren't happy with its ltn continuing but did the council listen to the 75% negative or the 13% positive?

whether real or not, whoever has formatted that letter should be ashamed of themselves

kentaddick said:

MrOneLung said:

Stop being a prick @kentaddick

you say 'I wonder why this is' as you are clearly inferring it is because he is Asian or 'non white' yet I have seen zero evidence on this thread that that is the case.

Personal abuse, nice. I'm still yet to see a reason to dislike khan - he's won the popular vote over and over, because people can't drive their 4x4s into london?

blackpool72 said:

MrOneLung said:

Stop being a prick @kentaddick

you say 'I wonder why this is' as you are clearly inferring it is because he is Asian or 'non white' yet I have seen zero evidence on this thread that that is the case.

It was comments like these that led to arguments that eventually led to the HOC section getting closed down. 

I think you find it was because people couldn't stop making personal insults and telling people to "just fuck off". Ie it wasn't moderated/terribly moderated. 

Kents - you were being deliberately provocative with your 'I wonder why' comments
Like saying how can people criticize Boris when he won the popular vote

Friend Or Defoe said:

JamesSeed said:

No need to get all angsty, as it’s been a very reasonable discussion on here, I feel. 

Nothing like Twitter where Khan’s account get mercilessly trolled in a very unpleasant way. Perhaps some are reading that stuff and making unfair assumptions about the people on here who don’t like ULEZ being similarly motivated.

I think if they’d had the mayoral elections taken place at any time over the last few months Khan might have lost, but he’ll stand a much better chance next year when people are more used to the ULEZ expansion. 

However, now that the Tories have made mayoral elections FPTP, that opens the door a little for Susan Hall. Labour were successful around the country with the Supplementary Vote system, so it was always likely that the Tories would switch to a different one. With the ‘left’ vote being split (rumours that Corbyn might stand) it might be very close. 

Hall says she would scrap the ULEZ expansion, but would meet her statutory requirement to cut air pollution by spending £50M. She says:

‘This could be making a bus route zero emission, setting up air filtration technology, or adjusting roads to reduce congestion and idling.’

There’s something not very convincing about her imho. 

She's a clown and Londoners will see right through her like they did with Zac Goldsmith.

Let's hope so.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/sep/15/conservative-london-mayor-candidate-susan-hall-liked-tweets-praising-enoch-powell

Rothko said:

When answering a question on a safe space for nutters, you lose the host, you're fucked 

https://x.com/BestForBritain/status/1706951117265940714?s=20 

People are more concerned about saving money, we live in a very selfish country.

There is actually a fantastic scheme here in Vancouver which i'd love to see adopted in London. It's called Evo.

Essentially the City has invested in hundreds and hundreds of Prius's/Kia Neros and parked them all over the City. They're exempt from local parking permit restrictions and all the gasoline is free. You just pay a small rate by the minute and can pick them up and park them anywhere. You can even take them miles from Vancouver and they'll just charge you a flat fee of $110/67 quid a day (fuel still free). 

it's so convenient that I sometimes just leave my car at home.

The problem ULEZ has is hasn't convinced enough people that's it is necessary. Instead, people have been inconvenienced at their expense. There's no alternative to the people living in more rural locations. A scheme like this would be incredibly helpful.

cafcnick1992 said:

There is actually a fantastic scheme here in Vancouver which i'd love to see adopted in London. It's called Evo.

Essentially the City has invested in hundreds and hundreds of Prius's/Kia Neros and parked them all over the City. They're exempt from local parking permit restrictions and all the gasoline is free. You just pay a small rate by the minute and can pick them up and park them anywhere. You can even take them miles from Vancouver and they'll just charge you a flat fee of $110/67 quid a day (fuel still free). 

it's so convenient that I sometimes just leave my car at home.

The problem ULEZ has is hasn't convinced enough people that's it is necessary. Instead, people have been inconvenienced at their expense. There's no alternative to the people living in more rural locations. A scheme like this would be incredibly helpful.

That's a great scheme in a great city, but people would still moan.

If you want to drive in to outer region it won't cover you, if you're carrying stuff for work you'll have to drive into the city and change cars. People will find flaws in any suggestion that isn't carry on as you were. 90% of cars are except from the charge yet people claim the charge is too low or too high. It's like they don't know why they don't like it.

Khan could provide free school meals to primary school children and build tens of thousands of council homes and still get dog abuse. Kent above has asked why, I wrote that I believe it's due to the the government's politicking and use of social media. Rishi's recent U turn suggests I'm right perhaps that's why the thread has gone quiet.

Ulez camera van fined £110 for illegal pavement parking

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-67146762

Friend Or Defoe said:

Currently in Luxembourg where public transport is free. You still see empty buses and there are plenty of cars on the road. Trams are pretty packed though.

If that was London, they'd bring in a tram tax

the do nothing scenario would have also seen an improvement.

Just a shame the mayor had to have a pop at working class people. Hopefully it will cost him the election.

If people were going to upgrade anyway, why are people complaining about it? 🙃

O-Randy-Hunt said:

£23,000,000 in its first month its brang in so far. Nice work if you can get it. Its not about the money.

-£100m for the scrappage scheme.