2024 London Mayoral Election Thread

[p1stonhead]

JagLover said:

s1962a said:

I do this every day and it will affect me - driving from the outskirts of London into the congestion zone. £200 odd extra a month is no small amount. Where is the ULEZ-esque outrage??

ULEZ predominantly hit those on low incomes who needed a car/van to get around.

Did it actually though? You can easily get a compliant car for a couple of grand.

[rscott]

p1stonhead said:

JagLover said:

s1962a said:

I do this every day and it will affect me - driving from the outskirts of London into the congestion zone. £200 odd extra a month is no small amount. Where is the ULEZ-esque outrage??

ULEZ predominantly hit those on low incomes who needed a car/van to get around.

Did it actually though? You can easily get a compliant car for a couple of grand.

Far less than that - Autotrader have 76 petrol Focus for under £1,000 and they're all compliant.

[rscott]

Oliver Hardy said:

I am guessing the restriction on cars and the demand that more people use public transport, cycle and walk is because there is a love of cars. Well,  of course, it depends in whose hands these cars are in; it is OK for some people to be driven around in Range Rovers.

Listening to a debate on Khan winning, a lot of people were blaming the government for crime in London, not the mayor.

Assume you're referring to the Met Police Range Rovers being used to transport Khan around for the last few years since he's been receiving death threats? How dare they take their protection duties seriously..

When police numbers are cut due to lack of government funding, it's not surprising people blame the government. London's still safer than several other parts of the UK though. For example, knife crime is worse in Cleveland and the West Midlands. Greater Manchester is about the same as London.

[Terminator X]

Randy Winkman said:

trails said:

Otispunkmeyer said:

I don't disagree or agree with it. I don't live there and never will. By the time any of it gets to impact me severely I'll probably be dead.

You do have to admit the motorist is used as a bit of a whipping boy. Obviously there isn't a true hate going on because they'd be giving up a nice revenue stream in the process, so there is a balance. But I reckon there are definitely a few stragglers in powers that be that would dearly love to stop people driving. A vanishingly small number, but they'll be there.

In fact we had such a bloke turn up from TfL or TRL or maybe it was OLEV, can't remember, to give a key-note at one of our IMechE conferences. Conference was about engines and zero emissions transport technologies and things of that ilk. But the bloke rocked up and in a long winded and very polite way, effectively told us we're bad people and we're wasting our time Surprisingly, he didn't stick around on the panel or for the free tea and biscuits in the break so we couldn't probe him about some of his dubious looking graphs

Me and my colleagues actually had mad respect for him really. Effectively stepping into the lions den to poke it with a stick. Fair play really!

Thanks for taking the time to answer...it certainly feels like motorists are being held to account more than ever before and there is less chance of 'getting away with it' these days, I feel lucky to have grown up in a time when fixed speed cameras were more of a rarity and there were far less cars on the road

Your TfL/TRL/OLEV sounds like he adopted the right tactic; run away!

But conversely, the number of cars keeps growing each year, albeit slowly. I guess that's the reason for the "war".

Isn't that what happens when you let in another 700k people a year who mostly camp out in London and the SE?

TX.

[NomduJour]

Terminator X said:

Isn't that what happens when you let in another 700k people a year who mostly camp out in London and the SE?

Maaaate - London is Open.

[heebeegeetee]

JagLover said:

Total miles driven in 2022 was about the same as it was in 2015 despite a rising population.

There are some who have always hated cars and they now have more power. However they never seem to anticipate the inevitable consequences of their actions. They think that as long as they can make motoring difficult enough, or expensive enough, people will flock to public transport and cycling, but what if the journey is never made at all?

There's not many of these people though, are there, as drivers we still have huge amounts of choice and freedom, far more than any other traveller or road user.

The UK policy of restricting choice to those who can't or don't want to use a car is still in full swing imo, and is far stronger than anything I experience in any other country I go to.

[JagLover]

rscott said:

Far less than that - Autotrader have 76 petrol Focus for under £1,000 and they're all compliant.

Not really comparing like with like though.

I had a 61 plate Astra which still worked perfectly in every respect, including climate control etc, and this was hit by the ULEZ. So yes you can buy some old banger but it may not be reliable, or suitable as a family car.

[rscott]

JagLover said:

rscott said:

Far less than that - Autotrader have 76 petrol Focus for under £1,000 and they're all compliant.

Not really comparing like with like though.

I had a 61 plate Astra which still worked perfectly in every respect, including climate control etc, and this was hit by the ULEZ. So yes you can buy some old banger but it may not be reliable, or suitable as a family car.

Assume it was a diesel as most 61 plate petrol Astras are Ulez compliant. How many miles were you doing a year?

[JagLover]

rscott said:

JagLover said:

rscott said:

Far less than that - Autotrader have 76 petrol Focus for under £1,000 and they're all compliant.

Not really comparing like with like though.

I had a 61 plate Astra which still worked perfectly in every respect, including climate control etc, and this was hit by the ULEZ. So yes you can buy some old banger but it may not be reliable, or suitable as a family car.

Assume it was a diesel as most 61 plate petrol Astras are Ulez compliant. How many miles were you doing a year?

At the time around 6k a year, but I did around 105k miles in total in it.

You buy a car, and see it is well maintained and properly fuelled for years and, even though it is not worth all that much, you know both of those things have applied and it can still do what is required for the foreseeable future. Then Khan comes along with his penal charges and the answer is not likely to be oh just buy an old banger, where none of the above applies.

[Killboy]

s1962a said:

I do this every day and it will affect me - driving from the outskirts of London into the congestion zone. £200 odd extra a month is no small amount. Where is the ULEZ-esque outrage??

Use the "Private vehicles don't cause congestion" line

[NomduJour]

Killboy said:

Use the "Private vehicles don't cause congestion" line

Ban private cars tomorrow, you’d barely notice a difference in town. As we know.

[p1stonhead]

JagLover said:

rscott said:

JagLover said:

rscott said:

Far less than that - Autotrader have 76 petrol Focus for under £1,000 and they're all compliant.

Not really comparing like with like though.

I had a 61 plate Astra which still worked perfectly in every respect, including climate control etc, and this was hit by the ULEZ. So yes you can buy some old banger but it may not be reliable, or suitable as a family car.

Assume it was a diesel as most 61 plate petrol Astras are Ulez compliant. How many miles were you doing a year?

At the time around 6k a year, but I did around 105k miles in total in it.

You buy a horribly polluting car, and see it is well maintained and properly fuelled for years and, even though it is not worth all that much, you know both of those things have applied and it can still do what is required for the foreseeable future. Then Khan comes along with his penal charges and the answer is not likely to be oh just buy an old banger, where none of the above applies.

The bit I added is main bit though isn’t it….

[Killboy]

NomduJour said:

Killboy said:

Use the "Private vehicles don't cause congestion" line

Ban private cars tomorrow, you’d barely notice a difference in town. As we know.

Sure sure.

[Oliver Hardy]

rscott said:

Oliver Hardy said:

I am guessing the restriction on cars and the demand that more people use public transport, cycle and walk is because there is a love of cars. Well,  of course, it depends in whose hands these cars are in; it is OK for some people to be driven around in Range Rovers.

Listening to a debate on Khan winning, a lot of people were blaming the government for crime in London, not the mayor.

Assume you're referring to the Met Police Range Rovers being used to transport Khan around for the last few years since he's been receiving death threats? How dare they take their protection duties seriously..

When police numbers are cut due to lack of government funding, it's not surprising people blame the government. London's still safer than several other parts of the UK though. For example, knife crime is worse in Cleveland and the West Midlands. Greater Manchester is about the same as London.

Lots of people get death threats, they don't get police Range Rovers, yet he doesn't seem to be bothered about death threats when walking down the street or taking his dog for a walk in the park.

[Oliver Hardy]

trails said:

Oliver Hardy said:

It is a bizarre situation that a vehicle that meets C&U regulations has to then meet separate local regulations. Where will it end; will every single town in the UK be demanding vehicles be registered with them or else they will get fined?

Or maybe DVS is driving the standards in a direction they need to go, and it's only a matter if time before they are adopted everywhere.

Ok so adopt them everywhere, but a situation where an operator of a vehicle needs to apply for a different licence in hundreds if not thousands of different authorities is just not feasible.

[fido]

p1stonhead said:

The bit I added is main bit though isn’t it….

Not really .. you have to be smoking the ULEZ crack pipe to think this was anything but a tax grab. If TFL really cared about pollution in London they would a) check vehicles which are not even compliant with a standard MOT e.g. chucking out black smoke b) fix Hammersmith Bridge - the jams yesterday were a few miles long around Putney; it's not much better when the trains are running. Penalising a 2011 diesel (compliant and roadworthy) driven in Zone 5 makes next-to-no difference.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/council-apologises-ltns...

LTNs - another gift from Sadiq Khan. "if the total miles driven in inner London’s LTN boroughs had increased at the same rate as the non-LTN boroughs, it would have saved 89 million miles of driving." - all that extra pollutiion from longer journeys!

Edited by fido on Wednesday 8th May 14:50

[trails]

Oliver Hardy said:

trails said:

Oliver Hardy said:

It is a bizarre situation that a vehicle that meets C&U regulations has to then meet separate local regulations. Where will it end; will every single town in the UK be demanding vehicles be registered with them or else they will get fined?

Or maybe DVS is driving the standards in a direction they need to go, and it's only a matter if time before they are adopted everywhere.

Ok so adopt them everywhere, but a situation where an operator of a vehicle needs to apply for a different licence in hundreds if not thousands of different authorities is just not feasible.

There has to be a transition period, if it is adopted...so some upset would be inevitable. I'm not sure hundreds of different licenses are required currently, are they?

Edited by trails on Wednesday 8th May 15:49

[valiant]

Oliver Hardy said:

Lots of people get death threats, they don't get police Range Rovers, yet he doesn't seem to be bothered about death threats when walking down the street or taking his dog for a walk in the park.

So he should stay indoors?

He’s a high profile politician who’s received numerous death threats from knuckleheads severe enough for the police to give him protection. It would be a police decision in any case much like for other senior politicians like the Home Sec or NI Secretary.

Should he be attacked whilst not receiving protection, there would be hell to pay and probably make world news for all the wrong reasons.

You don’t have to go too far on Twitter to see numerous threats made whenever his name is mentioned.

[Oliver Hardy]

valiant said:

Oliver Hardy said:

Lots of people get death threats, they don't get police Range Rovers, yet he doesn't seem to be bothered about death threats when walking down the street or taking his dog for a walk in the park.

So he should stay indoors?

He’s a high profile politician who’s received numerous death threats from knuckleheads severe enough for the police to give him protection. It would be a police decision in any case much like for other senior politicians like the Home Sec or NI Secretary.

Should he be attacked whilst not receiving protection, there would be hell to pay and probably make world news for all the wrong reasons.

You don’t have to go too far on Twitter to see numerous threats made whenever his name is mentioned.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FR4CdsHNorA?feature=share

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OjuRlQ29_A

so why is he in danger only when driven in his car?

[valiant]

Oliver Hardy said:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FR4CdsHNorA?feature...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OjuRlQ29_A

so why is he in danger only when driven in his car?

I’m not sure your point?

There’s security officers escorting him from the quick glimpse I saw. He has protection whether that’s on foot or being driven around. That’s the point of protection.

Unless you mean something else?