|
|
Post by greenboy on Oct 12, 2023 20:20:49 GMT
Nothing wrong in replying to something after a week. Did not see anything saying there was a time limit to reply to anything. Seems like he rubbed you up the wrong way over Starmer, as usual Labour can do no wrong in your eyes. That rose tinted approach is what costs votes which could impede a majority. The same way everyone was so cock certain with Ed Milliband and look how that ended up. I personally think Starmer is not a fan of ULEZ, but he does not want to throw Khan under the bus. There has been so much things he has said which it is obvious he is no fan of it. The press are just goading him but he is not biting their bait. I don't think wirewiper was being critical, rather suggesting that things have changed since Starmer's conference speech. Unfortunately I find Starmer to be too uninspiring to lead this country. The only way Starmer will get into power is because people will vote Labour tactically, because they've had enough of the Tories or think he is better or not as bad as Rishi Sunak. The Tories only got their 80 seat majority was because people wanted to get Brexit done. Starmer won't bring any good change in my opinion I totally agree with you about Kier Starmer, in fact I think the winner at the next election is likely to be voter apathy. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Oct 12, 2023 21:24:12 GMT
I don't think wirewiper was being critical, rather suggesting that things have changed since Starmer's conference speech. Unfortunately I find Starmer to be too uninspiring to lead this country. The only way Starmer will get into power is because people will vote Labour tactically, because they've had enough of the Tories or think he is better or not as bad as Rishi Sunak. The Tories only got their 80 seat majority was because people wanted to get Brexit done. Starmer won't bring any good change in my opinion I totally agree with you about Kier Starmer, in fact I think the winner at the next election is likely to be voter apathy. People probably think he's better than Sunak which is why people start tactically voting in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Oct 12, 2023 23:19:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Oct 18, 2023 22:19:21 GMT
Ulez camera van fined £110 for illegal pavement parkingAn enforcement camera van for London's Ultra Low Emission Zone (Ulez) has been fined £110 for illegally parking on the pavement.www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-67146762
|
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Oct 31, 2023 18:35:00 GMT
Latest figures show 95% of vehicles are compliant and the scheme is still generating £5 million in fines! Dread to think how much they would have raised if less cars were compliant.
|
|
|
|
Post by MKAY315 on Nov 1, 2023 3:03:09 GMT
Latest figures show 95% of vehicles are compliant and the scheme is still generating £5 million in fines! Dread to think how much they would have raised if less cars were compliant. Wait till 2025 when the tolling begins |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 1, 2023 6:09:42 GMT
Latest figures show 95% of vehicles are compliant and the scheme is still generating £5 million in fines! Dread to think how much they would have raised if less cars were compliant. I'm not sure how accurate those figures are considering how many cameras have been blocked or broken? |
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Nov 1, 2023 8:02:03 GMT
Latest figures show 95% of vehicles are compliant and the scheme is still generating £5 million in fines! Dread to think how much they would have raised if less cars were compliant. And if Khan is re-elected next year wait and see how much is raised when he alters the goalposts and more cars are deemed non-compliant |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Nov 1, 2023 9:56:56 GMT
Latest figures show 95% of vehicles are compliant and the scheme is still generating £5 million in fines! Dread to think how much they would have raised if less cars were compliant. And if Khan is re-elected next year wait and see how much is raised when he alters the goalposts and more cars are deemed non-compliant I find it more interesting that TfL won’t release figures on how much air pollution has decreased until after the election. It could be nothing and yet we won’t have a clear idea until after. That is key information that would no doubt help voters decide who to place in the position. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Nov 1, 2023 10:22:55 GMT
Latest figures show 95% of vehicles are compliant and the scheme is still generating £5 million in fines! Dread to think how much they would have raised if less cars were compliant. And if Khan is re-elected next year wait and see how much is raised when he alters the goalposts and more cars are deemed non-compliant I'm not sure he will change the goalposts but I do see more anti-motorist rules coming into force. One of his tactics to justify the excessive tunnel charge in East is to say there's not enough help from government. I suspect such charge will make it to the Rotherhithe and potentially Tower Bridge. Issue is he has an extremely weak competitor. The only time I'd even consider voting for her over Khan is if she makes it a headlining policy to review tube staff wages and also probably removing the nominated travel pass for people who don't actually work on TfL. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Nov 1, 2023 10:40:28 GMT
And if Khan is re-elected next year wait and see how much is raised when he alters the goalposts and more cars are deemed non-compliant I'm not sure he will change the goalposts but I do see more anti-motorist rules coming into force. One of his tactics to justify the excessive tunnel charge in East is to say there's not enough help from government. I suspect such charge will make it to the Rotherhithe and potentially Tower Bridge. Issue is he has an extremely weak competitor. The only time I'd even consider voting for her over Khan is if she makes it a headlining policy to review tube staff wages and also probably removing the nominated travel pass for people who don't actually work on TfL. The problem is no politician in their right mind would do that because the unions would convince every member, their families and extended families/friends to vote against them. It’s like how no politician has ever said they will actually tackle the fundamental problems of the NHS through reform, even though we all know but won’t admit it is desperately inadequate for a modern and large population, but will only ever say they will throw money at it. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Nov 1, 2023 10:48:26 GMT
I'm not sure he will change the goalposts but I do see more anti-motorist rules coming into force. One of his tactics to justify the excessive tunnel charge in East is to say there's not enough help from government. I suspect such charge will make it to the Rotherhithe and potentially Tower Bridge. Issue is he has an extremely weak competitor. The only time I'd even consider voting for her over Khan is if she makes it a headlining policy to review tube staff wages and also probably removing the nominated travel pass for people who don't actually work on TfL. The problem is no politician in their right mind would do that because the unions would convince every member, their families and extended families/friends to vote against them. It’s like how no politician has ever said they will actually tackle the fundamental problems of the NHS through reform, even though we all know but won’t admit it is desperately inadequate for a modern and large population, but will only ever say they will throw money at it. The issue is the NHS is excessively bloated in terms of its finances. The more money thrown at it, the more gets gobbled up somewhere it doesn't need to be. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Nov 1, 2023 10:51:34 GMT
The problem is no politician in their right mind would do that because the unions would convince every member, their families and extended families/friends to vote against them. It’s like how no politician has ever said they will actually tackle the fundamental problems of the NHS through reform, even though we all know but won’t admit it is desperately inadequate for a modern and large population, but will only ever say they will throw money at it. The issue is the NHS is excessively bloated in terms of its finances. The more money thrown at it, the more gets gobbled up somewhere it doesn't need to be. That’s my exact point. It reminds me of that American Dad episode where the CIA director realises they still have 50k to spend so the congress won’t cut it from their next budget so they all go to a strip club to spend it. It is exactly like the NHS, wasteful projects like diversity officers. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Nov 1, 2023 11:01:30 GMT
The issue is the NHS is excessively bloated in terms of its finances. The more money thrown at it, the more gets gobbled up somewhere it doesn't need to be. That’s my exact point. It reminds me of that American Dad episode where the CIA director realises they still have 50k to spend so the congress won’t cut it from their next budget so they all go to a strip club to spend it. It is exactly like the NHS, wasteful projects like diversity officers. Don't start me on them, they're usually Band 8s which in some cases can be 150-170% of the salary of a surgical fellow who performs open heart. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Nov 1, 2023 11:09:35 GMT
The problem is no politician in their right mind would do that because the unions would convince every member, their families and extended families/friends to vote against them. It’s like how no politician has ever said they will actually tackle the fundamental problems of the NHS through reform, even though we all know but won’t admit it is desperately inadequate for a modern and large population, but will only ever say they will throw money at it. The issue is the NHS is excessively bloated in terms of its finances. The more money thrown at it, the more gets gobbled up somewhere it doesn't need to be. In my opinion this not only goes for NHS, other government departments and private companies, the biggest con in my eyes are preferred supplier contracts. They are sold as you will get all you supplies from them in return for a discounted price. What happens in reality is you end up paying more than if you got it off the open market. I have a friend who works at a South London hospital, says he can purchase something of Amazon for under £60. To get it from the hospitals preferred supplier £800. I worked for a company in the private sector, had a meeting with a supplier whose presentation extolled the virtues of why they are doing such a good job saving money for the company. Well I had a limited budget, worked out what I could buy via the manufacturers sale to public RRP website. To my horror the quote came in higher. Contacted the guy who did the meeting to query what was quoted, and guess what, very quickly got an email saying the had made an error in the calculations and the new quote supplied was over 30% cheaper. People just send these orders off and accept the quote. It is not their money, and they follow the required process to procure items. These contracts make the suppliers huge profits, and probably the person agreeing the contract a huge kickback. I am aware of someone having a huge extension built by a supplier. Government seems to have less controls on costs than the private sector, so expect them to be abused more by this practice, but my exposure to the public sector is limited, but definitely not zero. |
|
