|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Mar 6, 2023 20:58:45 GMT
Any time you get a replacement part you, whether be tyres, alternator, coolant, wipers, or even existing car battery, you will not be using an original part, but that does not invalidate your insurance Some sort of universal pack could be agreed between manufacturers, to standardize, rather than have a Kia approved, BMW approved, Toyota approved etc... but we know the Government loves the revenue from fuel, yet extols us to switch to electric  It's the range anxiety that worries me. To get back on topic, it will be interesting to see the outcome of councils like Hillingdon's resistance to ULEZ. Ironic that Boris Johnson, founder of ULEZ, doesn't want it anywhere near his borough  the ULEZ is only a modified version of the LEZ, which was created by Ken Livingstone. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Mar 6, 2023 21:09:37 GMT
Interesting to see the latest stats on Khan's approval rating for Jan. 48% of those polled thought he was doing a bad job. 38% of those polled thought he was doing a good job. Approval rating -10% Could Khan be the cause of a Conservative mayoral victory, at a time when they are universally loathed. Some feat if he achieved it. About time he realises he is poison and withdraws as the Labour nomination for the Mayoral race. bahaha, you would be lucky. I think I have more faith in Spurs winning the premier league than Khan withdrawing. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Mar 6, 2023 21:32:05 GMT
And why is that? If Khan is the next Labour candidate for elections in 2024 and he indeed railroads the ULEZ expansion, then he's done for unfortunately. Johnson's tenure wasn't all bad and compared to the Son of a Bus Driver, his expenditure & investment on TfL was much better. However we need to remember that Boris also won due to failing Labour support within the general public. Boris was riding on the back of Conservative success alongside falling Labour support. It's quite clear that there is not going to be any sort of Conservative success in the next few months. People in London aren't the same breed as in 2000 anymore, they're going to vote for Labour and not for Khan. How many people actually vote for their specific MP these days, they just see the Labour logo and put a tick or number next to it. It's not going to be very different in the Mayoral election. It was not just failing Labour support, ti was growing amounts of council tax and other hikes that Livingstone was constantly seeking and people were not prepared for it as it was not always reflecting in results. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Mar 6, 2023 21:47:25 GMT
Now the ASA has received hundreds of complaints about Khan’ new ULEZ advert. Personally, I think his ‘every journey matters’ phrase is a blatant lie, as his ULEZ plan would see poorer people unable to make journeys. The TV advert is a pathetic hypocritical wishy washy load of garbage. Past few years, I either switch off or change the tv at any TfL adverts, f**king annoying and nannying However, the every journey matters slogan has been used for some years now. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Mar 6, 2023 22:12:18 GMT
While I'm usually supportive of Labour, Khan seems to be going off on one completely. www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/council-ulez-expansion-free-town-centre-car-parking-harrow-b1062910.htmlPeople need to realise that cars are still very much the preferred mode of transport for people in outer London. A relatively poor Borough in Barking and Dagenham has a car parked outside almost every single house because of the terrible transport connections in the area. Barking is the only place you might see it slightly lower, but even then you often see cars outside every house that has a car parking spot for one. Why would anyone on the planet rely on an every 15 minute bus on a Sunday to do the weekly shop, when you can just carry a lot more in a car and go where you want when you want. In inner London it's a totally different story as you often have multiple bus routes running at far greater frequencies. The promise of various schemes is an empty promise completely. You need to put the improvements in first, not the other way around. I sincerely hope the ULEZ expansion gets blocked in the courts until improvements like this exist and are delivered in a timely manner. I'm in support of ULEZ on the principle of it but it's fair to say the current proposal has some shortcomings. And I blame central government for those mostly - TfL funding deals mandating revenue-raising schemes like ULEZ and unlike provincial cities (who've received £10s of millions for their ULEZ-equivalent CAZs) making not a penny available for mitigations, hence a small scrappage scheme, no help for affected Home Counties residents and very little in the way of extra bus mileage. I don't think the scheme should be scrapped because of these issues, I think government needs to pull their finger out and support London. Air pollution is costing the NHS too much and outer London is not immune to this. I also disagree with Conservative councils spending taxpayer money, in challenging economic times, on litigation for what is, quite clearly, political stunts against a Labour Mayor. Some Labour councils in East London have expressed concern with the scheme but have done so in a collegiate manner, how it should be. It is nothing more than greenwashing and would achieve nothing, many non TfL experts have concluded this. The only real method would be to ban all internal combustion cars. But we still have the problem of so much other domestic and industrial emissions in London, so in effect; would solve FA. The fact that many 90's cars which pump out worst emissions are ULEZ free goes to show the nonsense of it. Even worst there are ways people have manipulated the existing ULEZ scheme to drive in scot free. |
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Mar 6, 2023 22:14:37 GMT
The Son of a Bus Driver just gave a live ITV London interview, in which he was grilled about mounting opposition from all political sides with regards to the ULEZ expansion. The Mayor did disclose the scrappage scheme fund is now 170 million pounds, some 60 million shy of what City Hall says is needed to cover all affected parties. I tend to be impartial with my political views but I do believe this is an unfortunate legacy project, brought forward a year or so so that the launch is within Sadiq's tenure as Mayor. It may well come at a cost to Labour winning the next mayoral election. It's clear the Mayor doesn't want to stump up all the cash, so at least work with the outer borough councils to not impose such a quick timescale. A staggered approach could do well; big businesses with HGVs first, then SMEs, then private cars as a general outlay won't be bad. But as aforementioned, Sadiq railroading ULEZ would likely be his last achievement as London mayor. I doubt it, Khan would win regardless, it is a done deal. London has changed a lot. Even if Khan put measures for council tax to rise by £10,000 in London, he would still win. I believe what you are implying, multicultural London keeping in a non-white Mayor, has no bearing if he hasn't actually helped those demographics out. A fares freeze was pretty much it, but 2019 feels a long way away from 2023 and the Son of a Bus Driver hasn't done anything regarded as positive for BAME residents living in London. Hell, he called residents far right Covid deniers at Mayor's Question Time for disagreeing with his ULEZ policy. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Mar 6, 2023 22:17:05 GMT
It will probably come as no surprise to hear that I am against ULEZ expansion. On paper it seems great, but in reality, ineffective. Let's look at maps of air pollution in London on a typical day. The most polluted areas are Heathrow, and inner London, areas already covered by the ULEZ, or contain aviation pollution. The fact inner London has higher pollution than outer London, shows the current ULEZ is severely ineffective or just not working. You then look at outer London other than Heathrow, and it is mainly a sea of the deepest blues, the best readings you can get. Central London is still the worst, outer London does not need ULEZ, it is currently better than Central London. Government stats, depending on pollutant show on average 10-12% is attributable to motoring sources. This means, that even if the ULEZ results in a 20% emissions reduction (which the current one does not), you only get a 2% overall reduction in pollution. If the current levels of pollution are going to affect someone's health, it is unlikely the changes will bring them much benefit. Most pollutants from motoring on average are about 5% of the level they were in 1990. So 1990 was 20 times as bad. Was it armagedden then? If not, why should it be now? If there are issues, the real cause is being covered up, probably because tackling would be difficult and even more unpopular. Tackling it seems to be beyond what the Mayor and the other government figures are willing to undertake at the present time. So why scapegoat motorist? The answer is easy. Love them or loathe them, in the 90s the EU started a progressive series of regulations that have cleaned up the motoring industry considerably. Year on year, these regulations have caused motoring pollution to drop as older cars naturally are replaced. There already is a path to zero emissions (no mention of the 500 tonnes of ore that needs to be mined to create the batteries for one bus), so by 2040 motoring emissions will be negligible. This is without any other political interference. By introducing policies against motoring, politicians can take credit and say their policies are working. Nothing like backing a 100% certainty. Yes, pollution is being reduced, but this is not a result of UK or London policies ... it is a legacy of EU regulations. The people that this policy hits hardest are the poorest. To me it is just another tax on the poor. And that is something I can not support. Can you? As previously stated, by 2040 motoring air pollution will be virtually eliminated. When there are still air pollution issues then, what will they do? They don't have a plan, or at least one that has been made public. Personally I am ashamed of the Mayor, the Government and the local councils to allow this ineffective greenwashing agenda be imposed of the UK public as a money making rouse! It is just another tax. We are becoming a high taxation nation, but not through traditional taxation channels. As you have mentioned 1990 was fare worse and we did not hear of people dying constantly. Nothing more than backdoor stealth taxes. I am not convinced with electricity when the source of electric is not green. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Mar 6, 2023 22:22:52 GMT
I completely agree and it’s facts like these which could see the policy open to extreme criticism in court. But the reality is Khan doesn’t care because the the people protesting live in areas that either don’t vote for him or are not a target for flipping at elections. If we are heading towards an electric and cleaner fuel future what next. Accept the ULEZ and its road pricing next, which would affect everyone. So ignore congestion and implement pro car decisions whilst public transport continues to be bottom of the pile behind motorists and cyclists alike But ULEZ is NOT tackling congestion, NOR is the congestion charge. It is no wonder the US and other embassies refuse to pay it and I honestly do NOT blame them. Congestion in the congestion charge zone is worst now than 2003. If it is such an excellent idea, why has many worldwide cities not bother to implement this? |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Mar 6, 2023 22:30:09 GMT
Pollution is the Mayors driver for the ULEZ, not reducing congestion. He and the councils implement policies to increase congestion, so is obviously not seen as a major issue. If everyone was to drive a compliant car, congestion would not be impacted by ULEZ, so is totally a irrelevant argument for this policy. Not saying congestion is not a problem, but ULEZ is not about tackling it. He even has an ineffective scrapage policy to incentivise you to replace your vehicles. You live within the current ULEZ, so is it congestion free now? **EDIT** How is this pro-car anything. The policy is anti-motoring ... Will just add costs to anything that gets delivered, or force companies to reduce workforces/close. We can do without more things fueling inflation. When was last time any pro-car policy was implemented in London? Levels of pollution are worse in ULEZ areas than non-ULEZ areas (excluding aviation pollution). Why should we aspire to reach levels that are worse than we currently have? Once again, you presume I’m talking about solely ULEZ - I’m talking about any scheme of this nature be it ULEZ or road pricing or something else which was mentioned in the final sentence of the post I quoted. The only reason why the ULEZ as it stands hasn’t led to lower congestion is because a decent to good transport policy hasn’t been implemented alongside due to a combination of mayoral and governmental incompetence. Your own solution, let’s be frank, is build more roads which is hilariously flawed as this will only attract more cars and do nothing for congestion as has been proved several times in the past. Maybe pro car is wrong choice of words but the way you talk is if your bottom of the pecking order. Us transport users get almost next to nothing. Levels are worse in Inner London because as studies have shown, more traffic is in Inner London than Outer presumably because of density and where people are going. A study in Lambeth showed the bulk of people who drive in the borough don’t actually live there which makes sense as Lambeth has one of the lowest car ownership rates in the UK, let alone London so whilst I get why you would be against it for some other reasons mentioned, to argue levels would increase in Outer London because of the scheme is scare mongering and interpreting information incorrectly But then places like Lambeth has high amounts of delivery vehicles from internet orders and loads of Uber type mini cabs touting for trade. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Mar 6, 2023 22:33:10 GMT
Once again, you presume I’m talking about solely ULEZ - I’m talking about any scheme of this nature be it ULEZ or road pricing or something else which was mentioned in the final sentence of the post I quoted. The only reason why the ULEZ as it stands hasn’t led to lower congestion is because a decent to good transport policy hasn’t been implemented alongside due to a combination of mayoral and governmental incompetence. Your own solution, let’s be frank, is build more roads which is hilariously flawed as this will only attract more cars and do nothing for congestion as has been proved several times in the past. Maybe pro car is wrong choice of words but the way you talk is if your bottom of the pecking order. Us transport users get almost next to nothing. Levels are worse in Inner London because as studies have shown, more traffic is in Inner London than Outer presumably because of density and where people are going. A study in Lambeth showed the bulk of people who drive in the borough don’t actually live there which makes sense as Lambeth has one of the lowest car ownership rates in the UK, let alone London so whilst I get why you would be against it for some other reasons mentioned, to argue levels would increase in Outer London because of the scheme is scare mongering and interpreting information incorrectly But then places like Lambeth has high amounts of delivery vehicles from internet orders and loads of Uber type mini cabs touting for trade. A lot of those delivery firms like Evri, UPS, FedEx etc are slowly converting their fleets to electric vans. As for the Ubers and minicabs TfL could easily force them to convert to electric as part of their licence conditions but they aren’t. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Mar 6, 2023 22:38:05 GMT
Interesting to see the latest stats on Khan's approval rating for Jan. 48% of those polled thought he was doing a bad job. 38% of those polled thought he was doing a good job. Approval rating -10% Could Khan be the cause of a Conservative mayoral victory, at a time when they are universally loathed. Some feat if he achieved it. About time he realises he is poison and withdraws as the Labour nomination for the Mayoral race. bahaha, you would be lucky. I think I have more faith in Spurs winning the premier league than Khan withdrawing. Spurs might do it sometime in the future if they year begins with a 2 .. only another 976 seasons to go! |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Mar 6, 2023 22:41:19 GMT
I met Shaun a couple times during the hustings and went campaigning with him a couple of times and he was never anything but nice to everyone he met. I think he would have made an excellent mayor who genuinely understood the communities who needed the most help. Khan is too much of a mouthpiece for rhetoric, he doesn’t actually do anything My main issue with the current Mayor is all his policies seem to be I want to do this and I want Central Government to pay for it. I would much rather politicians at all levels have policies that work within their means and budgets rather than having a crazy list for spending tax payers money on irresponsible schemes, when there is already sufficient and worthwhile schemes being funded by the public purse. To be honest, never a fan of Bailey, he did a lot better than myself and most expected. Would he have been better or worse? Lets be honest, the bar has been set extremely low, so I would say he probably would have done better. How much better is probably debatable. When Livingstone did not get government backing from Labour, he showed them and proved his point to win them over. If Khan did a lot more listening than trying to be a mouthpiece, maybe he would get somewhere. |
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Mar 6, 2023 22:45:27 GMT
But then places like Lambeth has high amounts of delivery vehicles from internet orders and loads of Uber type mini cabs touting for trade. A lot of those delivery firms like Evri, UPS, FedEx etc are slowly converting their fleets to electric vans. As for the Ubers and minicabs TfL could easily force them to convert to electric as part of their licence conditions but they aren’t. The rules were changed on 1st January 2023, minicabs registered since then have to be zero emission capable, and there is a max 10 year rule, so they will convert by 31/12/32 tfl.gov.uk/info-for/taxis-and-private-hire/emissions-standards-for-phvs |
|
|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Mar 6, 2023 22:51:05 GMT
bahaha, you would be lucky. I think I have more faith in Spurs winning the premier league than Khan withdrawing. Spurs might do it sometime in the future if they year begins with a 2 .. only another 976 seasons to go! Khan unfortunately is so arrogant that he thinks he is right. Whoever runs against him, Khan will still win, I don't see anyone else coming close, judging by voting patterns in London. I wouldn't vote Khan and nor am I backing him, but what if the alternative was worse? |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Mar 6, 2023 23:01:31 GMT
Spurs might do it sometime in the future if they year begins with a 2 .. only another 976 seasons to go! Khan unfortunately is so arrogant that he thinks he is right. Whoever runs against him, Khan will still win, I don't see anyone else coming close, judging by voting patterns in London. I wouldn't vote Khan and nor am I backing him, but what if the alternative was worse? The only person who I think can beat Khan, is Corbyn. But cannot see him wanting to run against Khan. |
|
It's the range anxiety that worries me. 
