2024 London Mayoral Election Thread

[trails]

Otispunkmeyer said:

People say the ULEZ affects a small number of people, yet has a blanket roll out. Presumably, ULEZ is just the Trojan horse under which to get all these cameras out. If it affects so little people and in the future will affect even less as cars are replaced with newer less polluting or even electric ones, then what was the justification for the expenditure? seems like ROI wouldn't ever be seen. Now you could just assume that its pure altruism, a lot of money spent for a disproportionally small improvement the air quality, all out of the goodness of their hearts. But we know government doesn't work like that. It'll be Pay Per Mile or Pay Per Zone or something next. Whatever "until the pips squeak" anti-car idea they can think up next.

I actually just wish that sometimes one of them had the real gumption to just say "right, we hate cars and we hate drivers and so we're banning the lot of you starting on such and such a date. Its a bicycle, walking or the tube for you if you want to come here. Deal with it" I'd actually have more respect for them if they did that. They'd have a fk-ton of problems to solve overnight sure (many of their own making) but, you know, we did get to the moon before the 1970s when everything was slide rules and pocket protectors. So we can solve hard problems when we want to and it can be done by governments!

Do you honestly believe in the 'hate' for cars and a 'war' against motorists type narrative, or is the use of such emotive language just because you disagree with the direction of travel () current legislation is taking?

[Otispunkmeyer]

trails said:

Otispunkmeyer said:

People say the ULEZ affects a small number of people, yet has a blanket roll out. Presumably, ULEZ is just the Trojan horse under which to get all these cameras out. If it affects so little people and in the future will affect even less as cars are replaced with newer less polluting or even electric ones, then what was the justification for the expenditure? seems like ROI wouldn't ever be seen. Now you could just assume that its pure altruism, a lot of money spent for a disproportionally small improvement the air quality, all out of the goodness of their hearts. But we know government doesn't work like that. It'll be Pay Per Mile or Pay Per Zone or something next. Whatever "until the pips squeak" anti-car idea they can think up next.

I actually just wish that sometimes one of them had the real gumption to just say "right, we hate cars and we hate drivers and so we're banning the lot of you starting on such and such a date. Its a bicycle, walking or the tube for you if you want to come here. Deal with it" I'd actually have more respect for them if they did that. They'd have a fk-ton of problems to solve overnight sure (many of their own making) but, you know, we did get to the moon before the 1970s when everything was slide rules and pocket protectors. So we can solve hard problems when we want to and it can be done by governments!

Do you honestly believe in the 'hate' for cars and a 'war' against motorists type narrative, or is the use of such emotive language just because you disagree with the direction of travel () current legislation is taking?

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!

[trails]

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!

[and31]

trails said:

I don't drive a lorry

I was being sarcastic

[trails]

and31 said:

trails said:

I don't drive a lorry

I was being sarcastic

...but not watching for the Parrot in your blind spot, if only there was tech available to help out

[and31]

trails said:

...but not watching for the Parrot in your blind spot, if only there was tech available to help out

[rambo19]

z4RRSchris said:

could just ban lorry’s from central london and use last mile logistics, vans, bikes, scooters etc,

I drive a lorry.
Sadly, you would need loads of vans to replace the lorries and it would be worse for traffic/pollution.

[Randy Winkman]

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".

[NomduJour]

S600BSB said:

20mph zones mean fewer accidents and lower emissions for people who live in them. What’s not to like?

Why not 10 mph? Or 5 mph? What’s not to like?

[Oliver Hardy]

trails said:

Otispunkmeyer said:

People say the ULEZ affects a small number of people, yet has a blanket roll out. Presumably, ULEZ is just the Trojan horse under which to get all these cameras out. If it affects so little people and in the future will affect even less as cars are replaced with newer less polluting or even electric ones, then what was the justification for the expenditure? seems like ROI wouldn't ever be seen. Now you could just assume that its pure altruism, a lot of money spent for a disproportionally small improvement the air quality, all out of the goodness of their hearts. But we know government doesn't work like that. It'll be Pay Per Mile or Pay Per Zone or something next. Whatever "until the pips squeak" anti-car idea they can think up next.

I actually just wish that sometimes one of them had the real gumption to just say "right, we hate cars and we hate drivers and so we're banning the lot of you starting on such and such a date. Its a bicycle, walking or the tube for you if you want to come here. Deal with it" I'd actually have more respect for them if they did that. They'd have a fk-ton of problems to solve overnight sure (many of their own making) but, you know, we did get to the moon before the 1970s when everything was slide rules and pocket protectors. So we can solve hard problems when we want to and it can be done by governments!

Do you honestly believe in the 'hate' for cars and a 'war' against motorists type narrative, or is the use of such emotive language just because you disagree with the direction of travel () current legislation is taking?

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.

[Oliver Hardy]

trails said:

and31 said:

trails said:

Are you really railing against the DVS scheme...?

For thos unfamilar with it; https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/deliveries-in-london/d...

Yes as I’ve said in a previous post -personally I find that it’s very very distracting,and the side scanner always gives off false alarms .never had a problem using my mirrors correctly in the past
Our other cities manage quite fine without DVS I think…
Thankfully I don’t have to drive very often in our st hole capital.
How do you get on with the direct vision equipment in your lorry?

Have you fed back to your employer, TfL have been seeking feedback from existing users of the system for some time for the DVS phase2 roll out. Manchester are also looking at implementing, so unlikely to remain just in London.

I don't drive a lorry

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?

[JagLover]

Otispunkmeyer said:

I have only a few anecdotal observations on the 20MPH zone in London, but 1) I found it quite pleasant, particularly in an EV to just glide about with the speed limiter set to 23 mph. 2) As you say, there are cars everywhere anyway so if you're able to get to 20, you're doing well 3) The tool bags like the guy who desperately over took me and several others, on the wrong side of the road, before blowing through a red and nearly hitting a woman with a push chair don't care what the speed limit is anyway, he'd have done that had it been 30 or 40. So it didn't really seem that 20 limits made much difference to the London driving experience

It very much does at 5am on a weekend.

[JagLover]

Randy Winkman said:

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

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?

[trails]

Randy Winkman said:

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

I have no idea of the growth rate of car ownership, but I just see it as sensationalism...helps to sell papers and get that click traffic though.

[Killboy]

Is ULEZ still an issue for Londoners?

[trails]

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.

[s1962a]

Killboy said:

Is ULEZ still an issue for Londoners?

The next one is the removal of the congestion charge exemption for EV's at the end of 2025. I expect this change to be protested in the same way ULEZ was.

[p1stonhead]

s1962a said:

Killboy said:

Is ULEZ still an issue for Londoners?

The next one is the removal of the congestion charge exemption for EV's at the end of 2025. I expect this change to be protested in the same way ULEZ was.

And again it will ultimately be a non issue because realistically anyone with an EV these days is well off.

Even EV drivers don’t want to drive in proper central with the congestion charge, because you move at 3mph.

[s1962a]

p1stonhead said:

s1962a said:

Killboy said:

Is ULEZ still an issue for Londoners?

The next one is the removal of the congestion charge exemption for EV's at the end of 2025. I expect this change to be protested in the same way ULEZ was.

And again it will ultimately be a non issue because realistically anyone with an EV these days is well off.

Even EV drivers don’t want to drive in proper central with the congestion charge, because you move at 3mph.

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??

[p1stonhead]

s1962a said:

p1stonhead said:

s1962a said:

Killboy said:

Is ULEZ still an issue for Londoners?

The next one is the removal of the congestion charge exemption for EV's at the end of 2025. I expect this change to be protested in the same way ULEZ was.

And again it will ultimately be a non issue because realistically anyone with an EV these days is well off.

Even EV drivers don’t want to drive in proper central with the congestion charge, because you move at 3mph.

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??

Ok you do. Why do you do it?
Will it be cheaper to get the tube once the charge comes in? If so, do that.

I have no idea why EV’s (and I drive one) are exempt anyway. They take up the same amount of space as another car.