Could Boris be anymore of a legend?
Discussion
martin84 said:
Derek Smith said:
You miss the point by miles.
Whether the BBC, the envy of friends of mine from America, Italy and Australia, is a problem or not is immaterial and of no concern to Johnson. The only, and it is the only, reason he just merely repeated what little Jimmy Murdoch said in his McTaggart lecture was to such up to Murdoch and to get his support for the leadership.
turbobloke enjoys missing the point. He does that on purpose if seeing the point fails to suit his bias. Whether the BBC, the envy of friends of mine from America, Italy and Australia, is a problem or not is immaterial and of no concern to Johnson. The only, and it is the only, reason he just merely repeated what little Jimmy Murdoch said in his McTaggart lecture was to such up to Murdoch and to get his support for the leadership.
Your (DS) interpretation of what was said is also subject to bias, something that martin84 curiously failed to spot, nothing to do with mates' rates of course.
As to Boris, it'll be a pleasure to watch his growing popularity and success putting strain on blood vessels in the ranks of his opponents. Calm down dears, it's only politics.
turbobloke said:
y2blade said:
voicey said:
Soovy said:
He will be a truly great Prime Minister.
Hell yeah!
Hell yeah!!!
Opposing Cameron's cuts to Housing Benefit?
Proposing an amnesty for illegal immigrants?
Calling for a higher minimum wage in London?
Building an airport in a river?
I once worked at London Gatwick and I was told about 'requirements' for international airports. I've forgotten most of it - even at the time come to that - but I seem to remember that to be a London airport a location needs to conform to certain strict criteria.
An airplane en route to Gatwick (for instance) might be diverted at the last moment and this has to be built into the plan. Further if fog affects LGW then there is a distinct possibility that it might affect LHR as well so any other London airport needs to avoid such problems.
There was a bit about infrastructure as well, connections between airports.
The conversation wasn't that memorable and it went on for some time but I remember there being very limited opportunities for an overspill in the regs. I'm not sure Birmingham can have the L prefix.
There's Southampton internation airport of course. Everyone seems to be ignoring that. They'll have to cut the grass more often of course.
In essence it means that you can't just stick a pin in somewhere and suggest it would be a nice spot for a London airport.
An airplane en route to Gatwick (for instance) might be diverted at the last moment and this has to be built into the plan. Further if fog affects LGW then there is a distinct possibility that it might affect LHR as well so any other London airport needs to avoid such problems.
There was a bit about infrastructure as well, connections between airports.
The conversation wasn't that memorable and it went on for some time but I remember there being very limited opportunities for an overspill in the regs. I'm not sure Birmingham can have the L prefix.
There's Southampton internation airport of course. Everyone seems to be ignoring that. They'll have to cut the grass more often of course.
In essence it means that you can't just stick a pin in somewhere and suggest it would be a nice spot for a London airport.
turbobloke said:
martin84 said:
Derek Smith said:
You miss the point by miles.
Whether the BBC, the envy of friends of mine from America, Italy and Australia, is a problem or not is immaterial and of no concern to Johnson. The only, and it is the only, reason he just merely repeated what little Jimmy Murdoch said in his McTaggart lecture was to such up to Murdoch and to get his support for the leadership.
turbobloke enjoys missing the point. He does that on purpose if seeing the point fails to suit his bias. Whether the BBC, the envy of friends of mine from America, Italy and Australia, is a problem or not is immaterial and of no concern to Johnson. The only, and it is the only, reason he just merely repeated what little Jimmy Murdoch said in his McTaggart lecture was to such up to Murdoch and to get his support for the leadership.
Your (DS) interpretation of what was said is also subject to bias, something that martin84 curiously failed to spot, nothing to do with mates' rates of course.
As to Boris, it'll be a pleasure to watch his growing popularity and success putting strain on blood vessels in the ranks of his opponents. Calm down dears, it's only politics.
Thatcher did it, Blair did it time and again, and so did Cameron. It was pathetic and all three should be ashamed of their willingness to sell themselves to Murdoch. Johnson feels no shame so for him it doesn't apply.
Johnson is riding on the Olympics at the moment. By the time there's a leadership challenge to Cameron, probably after the next election unless he does something clever, or reasonable come to that, the euphoria of the gold medals will be over and Johnson would have done something innane and embarassing - at least to everyone but himself - and his popularity will be on the decline.
The tories need a leader, someone with a bit of sense and strong enough to sort out the factions in the party. Johnson has already shown hiself incapable of doing that during his time as an MP, upsetting just about everyone. Someone with policies which make sense.
There is a real chance we'll get Milliband and Harman. Beleive me, I really want the tories to get a decent leader as much as anyone as the alternative is too horrible to contemplate. That's why I do not want Johnson as leader.
Bias - I have to say that's good coming from you.
Derek Smith said:
I once worked at London Gatwick and I was told about 'requirements' for international airports. I've forgotten most of it - even at the time come to that - but I seem to remember that to be a London airport a location needs to conform to certain strict criteria.
An airplane en route to Gatwick (for instance) might be diverted at the last moment and this has to be built into the plan. Further if fog affects LGW then there is a distinct possibility that it might affect LHR as well so any other London airport needs to avoid such problems.
There was a bit about infrastructure as well, connections between airports.
The conversation wasn't that memorable and it went on for some time but I remember there being very limited opportunities for an overspill in the regs. I'm not sure Birmingham can have the L prefix.
There's Southampton internation airport of course. Everyone seems to be ignoring that. They'll have to cut the grass more often of course.
In essence it means that you can't just stick a pin in somewhere and suggest it would be a nice spot for a London airport.
Welcome to London (Oxford(Kidlington)).An airplane en route to Gatwick (for instance) might be diverted at the last moment and this has to be built into the plan. Further if fog affects LGW then there is a distinct possibility that it might affect LHR as well so any other London airport needs to avoid such problems.
There was a bit about infrastructure as well, connections between airports.
The conversation wasn't that memorable and it went on for some time but I remember there being very limited opportunities for an overspill in the regs. I'm not sure Birmingham can have the L prefix.
There's Southampton internation airport of course. Everyone seems to be ignoring that. They'll have to cut the grass more often of course.
In essence it means that you can't just stick a pin in somewhere and suggest it would be a nice spot for a London airport.
martin84 said:
They were talking about Boris as Tory party leader about ten years ago when it was acknowledged that in a celebrity culture, who do the Tories have who's more recognisable than him? Anyway as far as I'm aware he didn't even stand and they went for Iain Duncan Smith instead (great move fellas.)
Umm... Johnson didn't even become an MP until 3 months before IDS became leader and was obviously never considered for the leadership at that time.unrepentant said:
Umm... Johnson didn't even become an MP until 3 months before IDS became leader and was obviously never considered for the leadership at that time.
Perhaps it was a bit later, around Michael Howard time. I think it was more the media and some backbenchers making the noise, I doubt he was a serious candidate in the eyes of the Tory hierarchy.Derek Smith said:
Thatcher did it, Blair did it time and again, and so did Cameron. It was pathetic and all three should be ashamed of their willingness to sell themselves to Murdoch. Johnson feels no shame so for him it doesn't apply.
Johnson is riding on the Olympics at the moment. By the time there's a leadership challenge to Cameron, probably after the next election unless he does something clever, or reasonable come to that, the euphoria of the gold medals will be over and Johnson would have done something innane and embarassing - at least to everyone but himself - and his popularity will be on the decline.
Fair points. His kissing up to Murdoch is a major blot on the Johnson copybook and perhaps another example of how he's more cunning (and possibly just as slippery as Cameron) behind the bumbling personality. Although a more cunning individual wouldn't have made the speech's intentions so obvious. There is something to be said for an Olympic bounce, he's always going to be popular when Team GB are winning gold and he's making a fool of himself on purpose.Johnson is riding on the Olympics at the moment. By the time there's a leadership challenge to Cameron, probably after the next election unless he does something clever, or reasonable come to that, the euphoria of the gold medals will be over and Johnson would have done something innane and embarassing - at least to everyone but himself - and his popularity will be on the decline.
I personally don't rate Johnson as a serious contender for Prime Minister, I do see a major lack of alternatives to Cameron inside the current ministry but I just don't see Johnson being the answer. He's good at what he does and I think Mayor of London is about right for him.
crankedup said:
Trommel said:
crankedup said:
Or had you not thought about that?
Birmingham is 100 miles from London. Or had you not thought about that?
t poor as well. What is the fascination of this continued nonsense of pile everything into the S.E. about (well almost S.E.) Its simply not sustainable to continue expanding onto a creaking infrastructure. Whats wrong with using a high speed rail link from Birmingham into London, its certainly going to be a faster route in than if a journey had to be made from Southend into London or Stansted into London. I think Boris is, as usual just shouting out without any thought to reality in this instance.No, its a daft idea to extend Stansted, its why it will never happen and the reason the high speed rail link is going ahead. Southend estuary airport is simply a diversion, the cost alone would be on the wrong side of unaffordable.
turbobloke said:
Boris has some of the less desirable traits present in any politician, the problem for his opponents is that he has far more popular positives than they do.
This. Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of time for Boris but he gets away with an awful lot simply by being media-adept and charismatic which isn't enough. He is notorious for avoiding questions - I experienced this myself when I tried to ask him some at a public appearance he did, he was perfectly charming but I was Teflon'd pretty quickly and very much more experienced people than me have had the same treatment.
And anyone who's been to Mayor's question time will have seen how he deals with his opponents or anyone who asks him something awkward. He would never be able to get away with it as PM. Plus, his inviting Murdock to the Olympics was a massive PR fail - I can't believe he did it.
I don't believe he will be PM. It's likely he wanted to be, thought he might be able to and was told by lots of people that he could be. And as someone else pointed out, he did only just get back in as London mayor this time, even if people are choosing to believe that Ken's votes were dodgy.
Silver said:
This.
Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of time for Boris but he gets away with an awful lot simply by being media-adept and charismatic which isn't enough. He is notorious for avoiding questions - I experienced this myself when I tried to ask him some at a public appearance he did, he was perfectly charming but I was Teflon'd pretty quickly and very much more experienced people than me have had the same treatment.
If this was 1997 and you replaced the word 'Boris' with 'him' anybody could read that paragraph and think you were talking about Tony Blair.Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of time for Boris but he gets away with an awful lot simply by being media-adept and charismatic which isn't enough. He is notorious for avoiding questions - I experienced this myself when I tried to ask him some at a public appearance he did, he was perfectly charming but I was Teflon'd pretty quickly and very much more experienced people than me have had the same treatment.
I just think the veil would fall off if he became PM.
Edited by martin84 on Saturday 4th August 23:52
turbobloke said:
Meanwhile there's a parallel thread with some interesting comments here from about a year ago.
"I'm pretty left wing, and I'd vote for Boris if I lived in London."
So someone who doesn't live in London and clearly isn't left wing would vote for Boris as mayor."I'm pretty left wing, and I'd vote for Boris if I lived in London."
Very insightful.
B Huey said:
turbobloke said:
Meanwhile there's a parallel thread with some interesting comments here from about a year ago.
"I'm pretty left wing, and I'd vote for Boris if I lived in London."
So someone who doesn't live in London and clearly isn't left wing would vote for Boris as mayor."I'm pretty left wing, and I'd vote for Boris if I lived in London."
Very insightful.
crankedup said:
DJRC said:
crankedup said:
A hearty slap on the back for Boris then, not from me though. His unwanted interference regarding the 'proposed' Estuary airport, his vision in determining the Stansted airport needs another runway. Bog off, this is not your patch, keep your tomfoolery in London, thanks.
He's right on both scores.You dont fly much into or out of the UK. If you did you would understand.
Brum has a central hub airport...Brum International. I fly into it about 20-25 times a yr. I go straight into the train line and use it. Indeed a cpl of yrs ago I used it everyday to commute to work. Brum currently serves its customers very well, but it has a limited catchment area. You have East Mids relatively near by that serves its catchment area. They themselves are limited northerwards by Leeds. To the northwest lies Liverpool and Manc with Manc being the other main airport hub in the UK. That serves the north of the UK as its main airport. The capacity across these is inline with the demand.
When you fly into London, you want to fly into London. End of. My pref. is actually for City, its small, quick and its superbly located. Stanstead is OK, used it plenty of times and it provides an ideal "satellite" airport to the north-ish of London to balance out HTR and Gatwick to the West and South. The South East in general has vastly more population that engages in business flying, so the sheer suppy side of things drives capacity.
Next you have sheer arse of being 100 miles from your destination, if you want to make the central destination Brum and not London. It adds 2hrs or so onto your journey. "No, it doesnt, the new highspeed line will take less than an hour!" I hear you scream. Yes, it will I reply, do you know why I know this? Because I do it. Weekly. You will still have to wait for your train, you will still have to get out of the airport. You will still have to make your various connections. Now, just so I can really nail this coffin of yours shut, let me introduce Switzerland to you. Its the best train service in Europe. Its is *the* Gold standard. Now, in theory Bern is 1hr by train from Zurich. Zurich flughafen is 5mins from Zurich Bahnhoff. Hmm. Actually its 15mins, it stops at the main station for 10mins. So thats 75mins. You need 30mins to get through the airport. You need to get from your gaff in Bern to the bahnhoff. Thats anything upto 20min bus ride. Suddenly instead of being an easy hour just from the airport, you are in fact 2 hrs away. Which when you want to make the 7.10am red eye now becomes an almost impossible arse because the bus does not run that early in the morning to make the early train to get to the airport in time.
Ahh, easy solution you think...I use Bern airport! It costs twice as much. Doh!
How about Geneva? Thats only 75mins away! Make that 2hrs now into 2.5hrs.
This is what happens when you start adding train journeys into your travel plans instead of a direct flight from your immediate area to your desired destination.
You have only theories and NIMBY whinging. I have direct experience, that I pay for out of my own pocket btw, now on some corp. expenses. My flights are just to get home aswell, not for corporate raiding business trips.
And last but not least, as I mentioned elsewhere its 15% more expensive to fly into Brum than London. So by making this hub at Brum, you will be adding 15% for the flight price, then a further cost of the train journey onto someones travel plans. Welcome to reality, like I said I wasnt making assumptions, I know the exact reality of this issue and it was obvious you do not.
Someone who actually understands Airports (i.e. Not Boris) said:
“I’ve never been a fan of Boris Island,” he said, using the nickname given to the Estuary hub after it won the support of London mayor Boris Johnson. “From a technical point of view it’s brilliant. The big concern is how it’s financed,” he said.
“I don’t see private investors being interested given the realistic cost of building the airport and all the infrastructure around it is going to be £50bn-£60bn. The massive financial cost is a big challenge.”
Walsh also warned that opposition to the hub airport plan would be fierce.
“It can only succeed if you closed Heathrow,” he said. “Experience shows that hub airports only work if you close the existing airports.
“And if you think there was a big battle around the third runway at Heathrow, then you’re in for a surprise because that was nothing compared to the battle you would have over closing Heathrow completely.”
Walsh, whose company owns British Airways and Iberia, said expansion of Gatwick airport was now the most likely way to meet capacity needs in the south east. The airport’s agreement with the local authorities in the area not to develop additional runway capacity expires in 2019."
“I’ve never been a fan of Boris Island,” he said, using the nickname given to the Estuary hub after it won the support of London mayor Boris Johnson. “From a technical point of view it’s brilliant. The big concern is how it’s financed,” he said.
“I don’t see private investors being interested given the realistic cost of building the airport and all the infrastructure around it is going to be £50bn-£60bn. The massive financial cost is a big challenge.”
Walsh also warned that opposition to the hub airport plan would be fierce.
“It can only succeed if you closed Heathrow,” he said. “Experience shows that hub airports only work if you close the existing airports.
“And if you think there was a big battle around the third runway at Heathrow, then you’re in for a surprise because that was nothing compared to the battle you would have over closing Heathrow completely.”
Walsh, whose company owns British Airways and Iberia, said expansion of Gatwick airport was now the most likely way to meet capacity needs in the south east. The airport’s agreement with the local authorities in the area not to develop additional runway capacity expires in 2019."
Fittster said:
Walsh, whose company owns British Airways and Iberia, said expansion of Gatwick airport was now the most likely way to meet capacity needs in the south east. The airport’s agreement with the local authorities in the area not to develop additional runway capacity expires in 2019."
Whilst Walsh has obviously a vested interest in the matter I think there is a certain logic to expanding Gatwick. There is a considerable area of greenery around the place and in essence only one village is likely to be razed although life in others is likely to become somewhat less quiet.It's a very safe airport, touch wood. The last air crash was in the 60s when an Afghan jet ran out of fuel on approach.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff