2024 London Mayoral Election Thread

[nordboy]

I don't live in London but observations around the country are that people will winge and moan about the people in power Khan, local councils/ councillors, Labour in Wales, but when it comes to it, either can't be arsed to vote or just end up voting their 'normal' way?

I could put a red rosette on my dog here in Wales and it would get elected.

Now, saying that, it does seem that sunak and the Tories have spectacularly fked it all up and will no doubt be hoofed out at the next GE.

For Khan and Wales, like someone above said, who are they going to blame once they have a supportive Westminster Labour g'ment?

As for Khan, undoubtedly he'll use the Labour g'ment to get his Lordship for the next stage of his gravy train.

Bloody hate UK politicians and politics. I know they're pretty much the same all around the world but I just get fed up with the lying, cheating, grifting, and general self serving tts over here.

[paulw123]

Criminals will be happy to see another Kahn term as mayor. Kind of justifies ulez as well as if it was as hated as much as it's portrayed then Kahn wouldn't be back in and more than 40% would have voted.

[Countdown]

Re: ULEZ a lot of PHers have pointed out that it doesn't affect that many people. perhaps that's why it wasn't that big an issue?

Perhaps if the Conservatives had put forward a half-competent candidate they would have had a better chance?

[valiant]

paulw123 said:

Criminals will be happy to see another Kahn term as mayor. Kind of justifies ulez as well as if it was as hated as much as it's portrayed then Kahn wouldn't be back in and more than 40% would have voted.

Democracy's a bh, ain't it.

[Hants PHer]

Countdown said:

Perhaps if the Conservatives had put forward a half-competent candidate they would have had a better chance?

Hard to disagree with that. Firstly because Susan Hall was utterly inept. I don't live in London, but I take an interest in these things, and every time I heard Susan Hall on the radio I cringed. She appeared to have a loose grip on facts and figures (that's being generous) and was unable to say what a given policy would cost, and how it might be funded. She also dodged questions about why she retweeted stuff like Enoch Powell quotes: "Oh, I retweet lots of things, I can't really remember" being her defence.

Secondly, I think the Tories have given up on getting a Conservative London mayor (one might argue that they've just given up, full stop!). It' looks like a red wall that they can't be bothered attacking, at least not properly. The support for Susan Hall was lukewarm, at best. Perhaps Paul Scully might have got more backing, and as you say may have done better. A weaker candidate than Susan Hall is hard to imagine.

[119]

Hants PHer said:

Hard to disagree with that. Firstly because Susan Hall was utterly inept. I don't live in London, but I take an interest in these things, and every time I heard Susan Hall on the radio I cringed. She appeared to have a loose grip on facts and figures (that's being generous) and was unable to say what a given policy would cost, and how it might be funded. She also dodged questions about why she retweeted stuff like Enoch Powell quotes: "Oh, I retweet lots of things, I can't really remember" being her defence.

Secondly, I think the Tories have given up on getting a Conservative London mayor (one might argue that they've just given up, full stop!). It' looks like a red wall that they can't be bothered attacking, at least not properly. The support for Susan Hall was lukewarm, at best. Perhaps Paul Scully might have got more backing, and as you say may have done better. A weaker candidate than Susan Hall is hard to imagine.

are long overdue a Diane Abbott replacement so she would have made an excellent contender .

[S600BSB]

Hants PHer said:

Countdown said:

Perhaps if the Conservatives had put forward a half-competent candidate they would have had a better chance?

Hard to disagree with that. Firstly because Susan Hall was utterly inept. I don't live in London, but I take an interest in these things, and every time I heard Susan Hall on the radio I cringed. She appeared to have a loose grip on facts and figures (that's being generous) and was unable to say what a given policy would cost, and how it might be funded. She also dodged questions about why she retweeted stuff like Enoch Powell quotes: "Oh, I retweet lots of things, I can't really remember" being her defence.

Secondly, I think the Tories have given up on getting a Conservative London mayor (one might argue that they've just given up, full stop!). It' looks like a red wall that they can't be bothered attacking, at least not properly. The support for Susan Hall was lukewarm, at best. Perhaps Paul Scully might have got more backing, and as you say may have done better. A weaker candidate than Susan Hall is hard to imagine.

Scully would have been a sensible choice and a much tougher opponent for Sadiq Kahn. But isn’t he yet another decent Tory who is standing down at the GE? The Tory lunatics really have taken over the asylum! Happy days for Team Labour.

[scenario8]

Anything other than a Khan win in 2024 seemed vanishingly unlikely to me. Maybe Paul Scully might have secured a few more votes. Maybe. But how many? He’d have needed a few hundred thousand in addition to Susan Hall’s 812,397. Seems extremely unlikely.

Scully is standing down. He would have lost his seat in any case. No chance of retaining that constituency. Back to Lib Dem once again after only 9 years a Tory seat.

[S600BSB]

scenario8 said:

Anything other than a Khan win in 2024 seemed vanishingly unlikely to me. Maybe Paul Scully might have secured a few more votes. Maybe. But how many? He’d have needed a few hundred thousand in addition to Susan Hall’s 812,397. Seems extremely unlikely.

Scully is standing down. He would have lost his seat in any case. No chance of retaining that constituency. Back to Lib Dem once again after only 9 years a Tory seat.

We will never know, but he would have been a much better option than Susan Hall!

[s1962a]

paulw123 said:

Criminals will be happy to see another Kahn term as mayor. Kind of justifies ulez as well as if it was as hated as much as it's portrayed then Kahn wouldn't be back in and more than 40% would have voted.

Which criminals?

- The ULEZ camera bandits ?

- "chums" who were given PPE contracts?

- The ones who took £50k loans with no intentions of it back?

- dodgy landlords with unfit homes?

Would help if you were a bit more specific

[Dave200]

So Howard Cox and Reform managed 3% of the vote, proving unequivocally what a complete irrelevance they are in London. At least now we can put the talk of abolishing the ulez behind us and move on.

[and31]

Another of Kahn’s great ideas is the safer HGV zone,
On paper yes it’s great, a left hand camera and audible warning saying this vehicle is turning left-
Reality is, cyclists still come up the left hand side,all the time,despite the warning (the left indicator should be enough ffs) the camera is so distracting,all I can see from my left peripheral vision is stuff rushing by on this camera screen-my mirrors are all I need, but then if anything happens with all this new technology, the blame will lie with me
From October this year I need a forward scanner fitted-another distraction! I’d rather just look out of the windscreen for objects that might be infront of me.
I used to love london-I fking hate it now.

[funinhounslow]

oyster said:

You do realise that most people in big cities don't drive right?

So 20mph zones and low emissions zones will be vote winners not losers.

Even among drivers these issues aren’t major concerns.

The number of non ULEZ compliant vehicles in London is tiny - the most vocal opposition to ULEZ expansion came from Home counties residents who want to continue to drive their stinking vehicles into London.

I don’t think many people are bothered about 20 mph zones either - why the rush to get to the next red light or queue at a junction? A big chunk of the A4 near me has recently gone from 40 to 30 mph. Literally nobody cares.

Also - especially in London- drivers will also be regular public transport users, cyclists and pedestrians so will be well aware of the.advantages of ULEZ, 20mph zones and bus and bike lanes…

Very very few people in London get around exclusively by car.

[funinhounslow]

and31 said:

I’d rather just look out of the windscreen for objects that might be infront of me.

I thought the reason for these cameras and scanners was because of HGV’s blind spots?

[Countdown]

S600BSB said:

Scully would have been a sensible choice and a much tougher opponent for Sadiq Kahn. But isn’t he yet another decent Tory who is standing down at the GE? The Tory lunatics really have taken over the asylum! Happy days for Team Labour.

The Million dollar question is "What is the definition of a decent Tory"?

If the Conservatives want to get elected again they need to be closer to the "centre" than the Opposition but my guess is that a lot of dyed-in-the-wool right wingers (who support the likes of Braverman, Truss, Patel etc) don't see that as "real Conservatism".

[S600BSB]

funinhounslow said:

oyster said:

You do realise that most people in big cities don't drive right?

So 20mph zones and low emissions zones will be vote winners not losers.

Even among drivers these issues aren’t major concerns.

The number of non ULEZ compliant vehicles in London is tiny - the most vocal opposition to ULEZ expansion came from Home counties residents who want to continue to drive their stinking vehicles into London.

I don’t think many people are bothered about 20 mph zones either - why the rush to get to the next red light or queue at a junction? A big chunk of the A4 near me has recently gone from 40 to 30 mph. Literally nobody cares.

Also - especially in London- drivers will also be regular public transport users, cyclists and pedestrians so will be well aware of the.advantages of ULEZ, 20mph zones and bus and bike lanes…

Very very few people in London get around exclusively by car.

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

[James6112]

funinhounslow said:

Even among drivers these issues aren’t major concerns.

The number of non ULEZ compliant vehicles in London is tiny - the most vocal opposition to ULEZ expansion came from Home counties residents who want to continue to drive their stinking vehicles into London.

I don’t think many people are bothered about 20 mph zones either - why the rush to get to the next red light or queue at a junction? A big chunk of the A4 near me has recently gone from 40 to 30 mph. Literally nobody cares.

Also - especially in London- drivers will also be regular public transport users, cyclists and pedestrians so will be well aware of the.advantages of ULEZ, 20mph zones and bus and bike lanes…

Very very few people in London get around exclusively by car.

That’s fair comment.
I’m in Home Counties, use wife’s Phev to go see her family over your way.
I did need to take my polluting diesel in, when clearing the late Mils house recently.
Took it on the chin, but only billed 2 out of 4 trips on autopay.
I think the cameras were chopped down or stickered again by day 3!

It’s largely a non-issue now

I think the Tories saw a ulez opportunity, a bit of culture war, when the idiots in Uxbridge voted in a Tory (the same spanners who gave us Johnson!, who started ulez in the first place
Hall took it up, it backfired as most think it’s a good idea.
The Tory HQ culture war strategy was ill judged.

[and31]

funinhounslow said:

and31 said:

I’d rather just look out of the windscreen for objects that might be infront of me.

I thought the reason for these cameras and scanners was because of HGV’s blind spots?

So how is it ok to not have them in other cities? As I said, I can see what I need to see in my correctly set up mirrors-the cameras are a massive distraction.dangerously so in my professional opinion.
Next we are going to be forced to have scanners for stuff in front of us ffs!! We already have a mirror for looking right down the front .

[and31]

S600BSB said:

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

Lower emissions? How so? All those lorries grinding along in the lower half of the gearbox doing the same revs as they would at 30 mph
Thus pumping out more emissions to do the same journey .great idea..

[Randy Winkman]

and31 said:

S600BSB said:

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

Lower emissions? How so? All those lorries grinding along in the lower half of the gearbox doing the same revs as they would at 30 mph
Thus pumping out more emissions to do the same journey .great idea..

Are you sure your science works? Why more emissions?