Paul on the Radio

[Parrot of Doom]

I thought Paul was given a fair amount of time. Ladyman made his points, Paul argued against them, Ladyman produced his response.

I very, very much doubt that there was any bias. I have never seen anything in all my dealings with the BBC that suggest they're afraid of the government.

[JoolzB]

Parrot of Doom said:

I thought Paul was given a fair amount of time. Ladyman made his points, Paul argued against them, Ladyman produced his response.

Which was to immediately rubbish what Paul had said, essentially making out that his organisation were nothing more than a bunch of speed freaks, end of story.

Parrot of Doom said:

I very, very much doubt that there was any bias. I have never seen anything in all my dealings with the BBC that suggest they're afraid of the government.

Biased, well perhaps the BBC didn't mean it to be but the structure of the programme interviews was hardly fair imo.

[vonhosen]

Somebody has to have the last word, is it unfair simply on the basis that it isn't you ?
It seems that essentially SL was there to be interviewed & Paul was there to provide a flipside view on the topic.

Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 8th August 21:16

[turbobloke]

Parrot of Doom said:

I very, very much doubt that there was any bias. I have never seen anything in all my dealings with the BBC that suggest they're afraid of the government.

PoD, does your memory not go as far back as the various "inquiries" including and in particular the sexed-up dossier, the suicide of a certain adviser, & Bliar's part in the build-up to the Iraq affair? When the "official report" came out vindicating Bliar (apparently) the government's tame Rottweiler (A Campbell) laid into the BBC and heads rolled. After the resignations the BBC has lived halfway up the Bliar colon emerging for air occasionally and to receive instructions. It's possible that before the decision to extend, the beeb's licence review was used to add further pressure to roll over - but who knows. The constant flow of tame interviews and propaganda since then has been sickening to see. Occasionally they appear to give someone a hard time but then you listen or watch the same interviewer with an opposition spokesman and the same bias is clear.

We've now got the Bliarbiased Broadcasting Corporation for sure, and it shows most on fiscal and social policies including transport and the environment.

Ladyman showed his true colours here. When the cross-party committee on the environment's report on carbon fairytales first emerged, he initially gave soothing hints like lowering 70 mph limits and increasing road tax would be non-starters, as it was difficult enough to defend speed cameras in present limits...and difficult to justify why they're not raising the m-way limit, never mind lowering it.

You know when a nu labia politician is talking utter b0ll0x as it happens just about every time they speak. Exceptions are very rare, especially on anything to do with cars and speed etc.

[gopher]

vonhosen said:

Somebody has to have the last word, is it unfair simply on the basis that it isn't you ?
It seems that essentially SL was there to be interviewed & Paul was there to provide a flipside view on the topic.

That's right, and lets make sure the "right message" gets the last word twice without reference to Paul.

www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=296303&f=10&h=0

[JoolzB]

vonhosen said:

Somebody has to have the last word, is it unfair simply on the basis that it isn't you ?

It seems that essentially SL was there to be interviewed & Paul was there to provide a flipside view on the topic.

Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 8th August 21:16

I agree that somebody has to have the last word and I don't care if it was Ladyboy or Paul. You are obviously that thick skinned that you'd be the flipside of the argument and be prepared to be spoken about in that manner on national radio and your views simply dismissed as "nonsense". All this without the opportunity to respond?

Edited by JoolzB on Tuesday 8th August 21:46

[WildCat]

JoolzB said:

Parrot of Doom said:

I thought Paul was given a fair amount of time. Ladyman made his points, Paul argued against them, Ladyman produced his response.

Which was to immediately rubbish what Paul had said, essentially making out that his organisation were nothing more than a bunch of speed freaks, end of story.

Parrot of Doom said:

I very, very much doubt that there was any bias. I have never seen anything in all my dealings with the BBC that suggest they're afraid of the government.

Biased, well perhaps the BBC didn't mean it to be but the structure of the programme interviews was hardly fair imo.

I thought Clive Anderson made some comments which may have ruffled Herr Lady'sman a bit regarding camera fleecing.

We live in rural Cumbria. I have never seen our Speedfinder General's vans out on the roads where we know the accidents und danger occurs

He go for the easy peasy tourist trap targets instead. Do you know we have a sign saying that almost 600 die on A591 (Keswick und entry to National Park after Kendal) . This sign say "over last 5 years".

I have lived here all my married life und our eldest ist 19 years old. I was married just over a year before he arrived. (I was a child bride.. but am only just over 40 years und proud of it und that I still look in late 20s too - or so people tell me when they guestimate my age )

Anyway.. have lived here all my married life. I have not seen or heard of so many incidents on A591. The two fatal incidents at Ings were in scam rule und involved one illness und one driver falling asleep after too little sleep. No incident opccur within the 40 mph village stretch but at the more dangerous stretch beyond. Dangerous if you fall asleep or unconscious due to illness.

Of the collisions reported in our local press over the years - I can honestly say that there have been more rather than less since the pratnership started up. I cannot say 600 die on this road because I have not read of this in our Gazette und if this were case - they would be more supportive of the prats in any case. The feel of our local would not seem overly convinced of a job well done - und that ist the feeling of all who read und write to our local papers here.

Ist interesting that of all the calls into the show.. all (apart from one) said education was the way forward. Ist correct. Townies do not get any formal training on rurals. Von can say what he wants about this. But the bottom line ist

1. Few learners gain pre-test experience on rural roads

2. Few learners gain pre-test experience on faster duals of NSL limit of 70 mph.

3. Few opt for Pass Plus. Und only handful will give a discount. DL claim to give 35% discount. We tested with William two years ago. They did not. Our own insurance company - Fortis gave 25% with Pass Plus und 35% with his IAM und he now get 40% with a RoSPA Gold standard - after negotiating as we are "good customers" as a family whole. Can recommend this company as understanding und sound - und they are now one of the market leaders now. They also give a decent quote for our learner twins.

4. If insurers gave a decent discount for Pass Plus - more would opt for this und if we also had the carrot of lower insurance for a decent periodic assessment of post-test skills -- then just maybe we may see overall standard improve. Ironically - lot of calls to show suggest this too. Would be interesting to see if money ist where mouths are.

5. Herr Ladyman does not read this site or safespeed's site. If he did - he would certainly see that seriously competent drivers are COAST led und even explain that true skill und expertise ist safety-led - in tune with Highway Code, Road Craft und improving attitudes to driving. No one ist saying "speed limit free for all" but that the pre-occupation with enforcing a limit und pretending this ist only route to road safety ist a delusion und a betrayal to anyone who fall victim on the roads.

Sure - there are plenty of NSL roads on which I would never dream of driving to the limit. Only an idiot would choose to. But by ramming down throats that driving to a lolly limit ist "safe" - you bring about a mind set amongst those whose thought processes are not - well - as bright as one would hope them to try to be kind - that "so long as limit ist observed - one ist safe".

By all means have an audit of all speed limits und I did note that even Ladyman said that "speed limit must be too high if the drivers drive below it und too high if they drive above it" (to which Clive Anderson drily remarked that he would remember to claim this (und testing his car) as a defence if he got pinged ) But this audit should reflect reality - no problem if this ist case. Plenty if played to the tune of the "twenty plenty everywhere brigade"

Cumbria's trunk arteries are very safe overall. Prone to a little speeding - und this of course ist where the vans are.

They are never seen on B und C roads which are not overly safe und on which the local und holidaying muppets test out skills which they discover they do not possess at all.

[JoolzB]

WildCat said:

Lots of common sense(ible) comments

Can we elect you or Paul to replace Ladyboy or is that beyond democracy? It'd be good if the beeb could have a discussion type programme on the subject like they did for Foxhunting, the Euro etc and let people have their vote after the facts are known.

[telecat]

Hi Paul,

Signed up to monthly subscription. Go get em!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[WildCat]

JoolzB said:

WildCat said:

Lots of common sense(ible) comments

Can we elect you or Paul to replace Ladyboy or is that beyond democracy? It'd be good if the beeb could have a discussion type programme on the subject like they did for Foxhunting, the Euro etc and let people have their vote after the facts are known.

Danke Liebchen.

I think Paulie should be Minister in charge und hard pressed to say which of my many cousins should assist in the DfT IG cannot - he ist the BiB .. But perhaps my brothers.. my sister.. any of my cousins who are neither legal nor BiB. could form his DfT or a Select Committee for common sense.

I am not pro - Euro. Nor even pro - metric measures. My mind's eye as Swiss woman understand kilos und grams, etc . But I talk to my in-laws und their mind's eye estimate pounds und ounces very very accurately but are "lost" on metric. Their mind or culture simply cannot visualise, guestimate, enviseage this. Imperial measures are then part of the culture which this culture identifies immediately und accurately. No law can change this either. Could not hope to either.


I do see the fox as a nuisance as this creature ist a natural born killer as it enjoy the kill. Other wildlife kill to survive. However, I dislike the idea of causing fear und misery -even to a nuisance predator like a fox.. even though a fox - we think a fox - killed guinea pigs und the rabbits in hurtch cum run in our garden. :sad: I am pro a humane and hopefully painless end to the creature .. but I cannot see them as "cutesy creatures" based on experience of what they can do. I would forgive if nature und nature's requirement re food. On this I think we may be at odds - but I stress that do not want creature to suffer at all -- just dealt with as humanely as possible.

But fair play begets fair play und as a nation - we are showing displeasure by not voting at all. But.. this again ist a proverbial belch or fart in a gale force wind. Interest in politics.. even a tactical vote may get the required result.

Bottom line - economy needs the cars at the moment. It needs serious investment in public transport - convenient, cheap, pleasaont, punctual... in synch with other services too. It gets £60 billion from the car industry. Spends £6 billion on the highways - which does include prats und micky mouse committees too It spends just £6 billion on roads und this include the cycling initiaves

It spend even less on public transport as this ist all "privatised"

In short .. the politicians seen "Green" as fashion whim und as such "ephemeral" - such is the way of "fashion."

These people are not concerned with anything more than a return at the ballot box. Ist all lip-service und a desire to be perceived as "caring und green at heart"

But real pistonheaded persons.. who also are committed to the skills of COAST -led drives und real safety know that the proposals will cripple the economy und that a COAST approach ensures traffic flows und flows at a safe speed too

[Parrot of Doom]

JoolzB said:

Parrot of Doom said:

I thought Paul was given a fair amount of time. Ladyman made his points, Paul argued against them, Ladyman produced his response.

Which was to immediately rubbish what Paul had said, essentially making out that his organisation were nothing more than a bunch of speed freaks, end of story.

Which is not that much different to what Paul said about the DoT (I agree with Paul btw)

JoolzB said:

Parrot of Doom said:

I very, very much doubt that there was any bias. I have never seen anything in all my dealings with the BBC that suggest they're afraid of the government.

Biased, well perhaps the BBC didn't mean it to be but the structure of the programme interviews was hardly fair imo.

Both people got their message across. Both were quite eloquent. I was very much left to draw my own conclusions from what both people said. Just because Mr Ladyman got to speak 'twice' doesn't IMO make it an unbalanced interview.

[Parrot of Doom]

turbobloke said:

All valid stuff

...but I don't agree. The BBC have their charter, everybody (I mean everybody in the country) knows that the government got away with lying, but nothing changes.

I'll reiterate that I have never seen any BBC programme I've worked on seek to warp or distort the truth. The programme making departments aren't staffed by people with political ambitions - they're staffed by ordinary folk like you and me, who just want to get home and have some supper.

[turbobloke]

Parrot of Doom said:

turbobloke said:

All valid stuff

...but I don't agree. The BBC have their charter, everybody (I mean everybody in the country) knows that the government got away with lying, but nothing changes.

I'll reiterate that I have never seen any BBC programme I've worked on seek to warp or distort the truth. The programme making departments aren't staffed by people with political ambitions - they're staffed by ordinary folk like you and me, who just want to get home and have some supper.

Point taken and no disrespect but would you call the fronty line radio interviewers 'ordinary folk'? These folk are visibly (audibly!) biased towards nu labia imo. They appear to give everyone a hard time but the only one who really does is Paxo and he's losing a bit of the edge he had. Humphreys is an anti-car global warming true believer lentilist who likes to think his voice is important than the politician he's interviewing...shades of Sir Robin Day...and it shows. Other beeb staff behind the scenes are different, maybe, but it's the on-air people who we see and hear.

[JoolzB]

WildCat said:

JoolzB said:

WildCat said:

Lots of common sense(ible) comments

Can we elect you or Paul to replace Ladyboy or is that beyond democracy? It'd be good if the beeb could have a discussion type programme on the subject like they did for Foxhunting, the Euro etc and let people have their vote after the facts are known.

Too much to quote, sorry

Going slightly OT here. I'm not sure if you saw them at the time and I can't remember what they were called but I found them interesting and informative. An expert from either side was allowed to explain his side of the argument, followed by a debate. The audience had their votes at various stages of the programme on whether they were pro or anti. It was quite amazing how much the vote could swing over the course of an hour when the experts had been allowed to explain their points. Alas it was pretty pointless as His Tonyness knows what's best for us.

[julianc]

AdvocatusDiaboli said:

safespeed said:

JoolzB said:

Well he doesn't take organisations like SafeSpeed seriously, says it all really, he has an over simplistic view of the problem. He doesn't seem to be able to differentiate between dangerous nutter driving and exceeding a speed limit and we employ this cock.

I really don't know why you bother entering into discussions like this Paul, the bloke responds to your comments but you're not allowed to "discuss" his rubbishing of your comments. An absolute waste of time that you must find infuriating.

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. - Mohandas Gandhi

It's part of a process. We're on target.

Paul mate, I know I speak for all of us when I say keep up the good work.

Absolutely!

[jasandjules]

So Paul,

Get on a show like the news/radio with Ladyman again if possible.

Then, say the following:

Mr Ladyman, you have been convicted of speeidng 3 times haven't you?
- Yes (waffle, waffle, bull, bull,)
But, nonetheless, you hvae 3 speeding convictions? Yes or No
-Yes... (waffle?)
And Speed Kills doesn't it Mr Ladyman?
-Yes (waffle waffle)
And how many people did you kill?

[WildCat]

JoolzB said:

WildCat said:

JoolzB said:

WildCat said:

Lots of common sense(ible) comments

Can we elect you or Paul to replace Ladyboy or is that beyond democracy? It'd be good if the beeb could have a discussion type programme on the subject like they did for Foxhunting, the Euro etc and let people have their vote after the facts are known.

Too much to quote, sorry

Going slightly OT here. I'm not sure if you saw them at the time and I can't remember what they were called but I found them interesting and informative. An expert from either side was allowed to explain his side of the argument, followed by a debate. The audience had their votes at various stages of the programme on whether they were pro or anti. It was quite amazing how much the vote could swing over the course of an hour when the experts had been allowed to explain their points. Alas it was pretty pointless as His Tonyness knows what's best for us.

There used to be something on Friday evenings - late.. Tony/Anthony? Wilson und Lucy _ forget the surname.. but they also presented ITV's regional teatime show too. Was the thing which launched Mrs Merton as well if I remember right. Always heated debate und sometimes on the really weird too. I think ist this one? Was a good show but I cannot remember what it was called. The Friday something or other...

Was very good und provocative show.. entertaining too.

[safespeed]

jasandjules said:

So Paul,

Get on a show like the news/radio with Ladyman again if possible.

Then, say the following:

Mr Ladyman, you have been convicted of speeidng 3 times haven't you?
- Yes (waffle, waffle, bull, bull,)
But, nonetheless, you hvae 3 speeding convictions? Yes or No
-Yes... (waffle?)
And Speed Kills doesn't it Mr Ladyman?
-Yes (waffle waffle)
And how many people did you kill?

It's amusing, but it isn't really a winning argument, because with the speed kills model only requires the probability of death to increase.

I'd rather ask him:

- how he explains the failure of road deaths to reduce as expected?
- what research he has about the effects of his policies on driver quality
- what is the essence of safe driving?
and so on.

[JoolzB]

WildCat said:

JoolzB said:

WildCat said:

JoolzB said:

WildCat said:

Lots of common sense(ible) comments

Can we elect you or Paul to replace Ladyboy or is that beyond democracy? It'd be good if the beeb could have a discussion type programme on the subject like they did for Foxhunting, the Euro etc and let people have their vote after the facts are known.

Too much to quote, sorry

Going slightly OT here. I'm not sure if you saw them at the time and I can't remember what they were called but I found them interesting and informative. An expert from either side was allowed to explain his side of the argument, followed by a debate. The audience had their votes at various stages of the programme on whether they were pro or anti. It was quite amazing how much the vote could swing over the course of an hour when the experts had been allowed to explain their points. Alas it was pretty pointless as His Tonyness knows what's best for us.

There used to be something on Friday evenings - late.. Tony/Anthony? Wilson und Lucy _ forget the surname.. but they also presented ITV's regional teatime show too. Was the thing which launched Mrs Merton as well if I remember right. Always heated debate und sometimes on the really weird too. I think ist this one? Was a good show but I cannot remember what it was called. The Friday something or other...

Was very good und provocative show.. entertaining too.

No it wasn't those shows, not quite that entertaining. It was a "one off" 2 shows discussing the issues at the time, I think it may have been Dimbleby hosting, doesn't really matter

[7db]

safespeed said:

I'd rather ask him:

- how he explains the failure of road deaths to reduce as expected?
- what research he has about the effects of his policies on driver quality
- what is the essence of safe driving?
and so on.

I assume his wriggle will be that the measures have not been draconian enough and so he needs to do more... Did that help your position?