please empty your brain below
|
|
When I read the names of short listed candidates my immediate view was that the Tories had already given up on trying to win in 2020. Without a big name to increase turnout they stand no chance of winning. Were the big beasts thinking that 2020 will be when the Brexit chickens will be coming home to roost and they risked being anilhated in Remainder London?
A | 23.07.18 - 7:15 a.m. | #
|
|
“You've lost my vote instantly there” is laughable given your vote is nailed on for Khan.
Mark | 23.07.18 - 7:26 a.m. | #
|
|
The right approach would be to just abolish the job.
Sir Biton | 23.07.18 - 9:07 a.m. | #
|
The non-commitment commitments are out in force: -
I will expedite the move towards...
I will seek to...
I will accelerate the introduction...
Still Anon | 23.07.18 - 9:33 a.m. | #
|
I like how it's noted that they check off the non-white, gay and female checkboxes but one of them already said something slightly anti-gay, we expect dog whistle racism and I'll add on sexism to that.
I thought one saving grace of a Tory mayor might have been a return of funding, but there was that letter about not giving lines to TfL incase there was a future Labour mayor.
Toby | 23.07.18 - 9:34 a.m. | #
|
But will Sadiq Khan be available for a second term? He has managed to remain calm despite the sorts of pressures that a national politician has to endure and if he keeps it up he could be seen as a safe pair of hands.
Whatever he may say in public about his ambitions, if a vacancy came up for the leader of the Labour Party, and with a general election soon after, he would surely have to consider the possibility of being the next Prime Minister.
RayL | 23.07.18 - 10:54 a.m. | #
|
|
Khan has achieved nothing in his time as Mayor so far - very interested to hear evidence to the contrary. But don't see any Tory beating him 'cos demographics and all the rest.
David | 23.07.18 - 10:55 a.m. | #
|
The Tories are missing a trick.
Surely they realise that to galvanise the vote for MoL they need someone memorable, full of vacuous soundbites, and with gloriously recognisable straw-coloured hair. Yes, it has to be Michael Fabricant MP.
Frank F | 23.07.18 - 11:14 a.m. | #
|
The only way the Tories can win will be if they have a big beast, someone the public actually recognise, who will win votes based on personal reputation.
This doesn't have to be a career politician, the ex John Lewis guy won the West Midlands mayor election for them.
None of those 3 candidates stand much chance of victory unless they can really increase public awareness of them.
Mikey C | 23.07.18 - 12:08 p.m. | #
|
Anyone wanting a fully-electric bus fleet needs to think of two things -
1 - the manufacturing capacity to deliver that (and affordably)
2 - electric vehicle technology is changing so fast that an all-electric fleet will not be fleet-wide compatible (it isn't now - there will soon be a spares problem for obsolete technologies and buses not yet life-expired) and maintaining that will cost fortunes (we're talking big money, hundreds of millions -the costs of bus electrification already exceed fuel savings, so it has to be done on more than money grounds)
Also, the power-generating capacity to charge any great expansion of electrics isn't here (yet?). Much as folk may not like it and haven't updated their memories for new facts, we need trolleybuses with battery power - they stay on the road for longer, do not need full overnight charging, and do not with new batteries need constant overhead wires. Trolleys also have a longer road life than engined or hybrid buses - proven!
End of rant - opens new packet of Spangles.
Joel | 23.07.18 - 12:24 p.m. | #
|
|
Funny how none of the candidates mention how big a hole is being blown in TfL finances by the removal of the operating grant which was £591m in 2015.
Burt | 23.07.18 - 12:50 p.m. | #
|
|
Excellent for Sadiq to have a second term. After all, everyone who’s been Mayor of London for eight years has stayed absolutely level-headed and has not at all become a megalomaniac.
Sprout Eater | 23.07.18 - 12:51 p.m. | #
|
|
Did Khan promise zero strikes? His manifesto said he would "reduce the number of days lost to strike action," but not to zero. (Anyway, our last Tory mayor promised a "no-strike deal" with the unions and then apparently did nothing about it.)
martin | 23.07.18 - 1:56 p.m. | #
|
|
I was just wondering given that when it comes to transport, Sadiq Khan has hardly been a triumph as Mayor, what would have happened by now if Zac had won...
ap | 23.07.18 - 2:01 p.m. | #
|
|
I agree with Sir Biton. Do we really need a London Mayor to spend our money?
MikeH | 23.07.18 - 2:20 p.m. | #
|
|
@ap We may soon get a chance to see what Zac Goldsmith’s family are like in power.
Sprout Eater | 23.07.18 - 3:05 p.m. | #
|
|
It seems to me that these three candidates know very well who their suppoters are, and if my observation is true, Tory supporters are generally more well-off, and have little, if any, sympathy to the working class or whoever relying public service to live on. I don't deny that strikes and such can be annoying, but being so hard to them can only lead to a violent end.
Patrickov | 23.07.18 - 4:12 p.m. | #
|
Khan may be an 'all-round nice bloke', but he's an arse when it comes to motorcycles.
Pre-election he promised they would be part of the solution to London's congestion.
Since election he has broken this promise and make it very clear he does not want motorcycles in London. eg by including any bike over 12 years old in the ULEZ charge. Despite the fact they contribute hardly anything (1%?) to the pollution stats, they are an obvious solution to cut congestion.
This has upset a lot of motorcyclists.
bert | 23.07.18 - 4:52 p.m. | #
|
How much is peanuts?
I did a quick calculation based around 23,000 employees (from the internet), £10 a week spend that would otherwise be incurred but is not due to the perk (which seems rather low), and 50 weeks a year and I that would be around £11.5m a year.
Are these amounts reasonable? Is £11.5m peanuts? Is the whole removal of a ‘perk’ unfair in the context of a long and carefully negotiated total reward package? So many questions.....
Messiah | 23.07.18 - 5:15 p.m. | #
|
|
Who knows what can change in two years?
kev | 23.07.18 - 5:30 p.m. | #
|
Offering free travel for partners of TfL staff is likely to cost rather less than the additional salary that would be needed to make the job seem equally attractive to new recruits without that perk. The free travel is also not taxed as the cost of providing it is minimal (just a bit of admin - no extra trains or buses are needed, the extra passenger numbers being unnoticeable).
The fares currently not paid would not suddenly swell TfL's coffers, as some leisure travel would just not happen if it is no longer free, and more will fade out over time as staff move home or partners switch jobs. Removing the pass would be distinctly unfair on those members of staff and their partners who have taken it into account when choosing home and job locations.
(and don't forget it's not a Travelcard so no free travel on most National Rail trains)
Andrew S | 23.07.18 - 5:48 p.m. | #
|
TfL travel perk is taxed. Are they alone in receiving staff perks? Shop workers discount for instance.....
Electric buses are a misnomer pandering to the Green lobby, no pollution at the street, but loads at source of the power, plus a considerable amount is irrevocably lost in transmission from source to place of work, and huge costs in ancillary equipment and ongoing costs. Look at cost of installing equipment at places like Canning Town.
Batteries have a short finite working life compared to the vehicle bodywork (more pollution and resources). My Honda car hybrid battery needed replacing at 10 years. Cool £2.3k
Hydrogen is the way forward.
scrumpy | 23.07.18 - 7:55 p.m. | #
|
@scrumpy
Pollution at street level is the big issue though
Power stations aren't located in the middle of busy streets in London (and other cities) so the pollution will disperse, rather than linger around pavements and school playgrounds.
Mikey C | 23.07.18 - 9:28 p.m. | #
|
As another contributor has already commented, the effect of Khan's fares freeze and bus hopper fare on TfL's finances pales into insignificance compared to the slashing of the operating grant from central government. If Khan's policies really do cost TfL £640m over four years, the loss of government grant over the same period will be roughly four times that - £2.4billion or so.
Khan's policies do provide some benefit to some passengers (after years of above-inflation fare rises under his predecessor). The same cannot be said of the slashing of government support.
M | 23.07.18 - 11:00 p.m. | #
|
Well I fail to understand how anyone could vote Tory for anything. They are wreckers who trash this country in the name of God-knows-what - well, UKIP, actually - I just don't get it. (Bit ranty, but really...!)
As for driverless trains, someone, somewhere will surely come up with a risk assessment that packing 1000 people on tiny deep-tunnel tube trains with no staff will be a tad risky. Even if the train is staffed (as DLR), the person would still be best off in a cab with secure communication to the control room and ability to deploy the emergency steps, rather than being squashed in the crowd somewhere down the train with the rest of us mugs. They may as well therefore continue to operate the doors and press the 'start' buttons as they do now, not to mention having the benefit of being trained to move the train in manual driving mode if the need arises.
NickW | 24.07.18 - 12:24 a.m. | #
|
|
NickW it's worth noting no-one is suggesting that the old tube lines without a walkway go fully automated. Where there is a walkway there are other issues to solve, you list some of them,
Toby | 24.07.18 - 9:44 a.m. | #
|
For those feverishly calculating the cost of staff losing their travel concession I'd suggest they re-read the policy statement. Mr Boff is talking about removing the concession from partners and those who live in the same household as employees but NOT employees. The Tories and, to a lesser extent, Lib Dems have been obsessed with this policy for years. I don't agree with their approach at all but in the context of a £10bn budget a small travel concession is not exactly huge. I'd also point out that seeking to exclude "partners" from the concession is not exactly "up to date" and in line with equality legislation. On that basis I'm mildly surprised Mr Boff can't see the flaw in his own proposal.
On the wider question I wonder what sort of London (and country) we will have come 2020 and whether we will even be having elections by then. If things go really, really badly we're more likely to be being governed under emergency legislation than normal politics. I'm from the "deeply sceptical / very worried" part of public opinion on issues related to the future of this country and its government.
PC | 26.07.18 - 2:07 p.m. | #
|
|
@ Toby - the Treasury have been trying for decades to get London's transport to operate with a revenue subsidy. Now they have basically succeeded they are not going to return it. It would never happen under a Tory govt and I doubt it would under Labour. If any revenue subsidy was to be splashed around for public transport it would go to areas away from London.
PC | 26.07.18 - 2:15 p.m. | #
|
The Conservative choice is Shaun Bailey.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-45677156
Prepare for 20 months of campaigning :(
diamond geezer | Homepage | 28.09.18 - 11:52 a.m. | #
|
|
|
TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy
|