Livingstone i pressume?

Former Member

Educate me ...London is a faraway land and i realy don't give a crap who becomes the bleedin mayor but ...i watched Paxman last night with Ken and Boris and that twat Paddick. Ken strikes me as a guy who has done a good job ...Boris makes it all up as he goes along and isn't very good at it and the other guy ...well he's a twat. I have to read about it in the papers ...it has even less to do with me than the London olympics but ...educate me please.

Former Member

I got the feeling Paxman didn't like Boris very much.

What makes Paddick a twat?

Former Member

Runnymede wrote: »

I got the feeling Paxman didn't like Boris very much.

What makes Paddick a twat?

Yes i got that feeling too! Just me probably but the guy always seems to want to appear important and clever and he just isn't. I just can't stand prententious ...twats.

Former Member

He was just trying to appeal to those peope who are tired of Ken's policies (there are many), but who also think that Boris is a no-hoper.

Former Member

I'm going to be voting for Red Ken :yes:

Former Member

Ken has been a bit of a mixed bag, but London has improved under his watch. Basically he'd be alright if he just kept his mouth shut.

Former Member

budda wrote: »

Ken has been a bit of a mixed bag, but London has improved under his watch. Basically he'd be alright if he just kept his mouth shut.

But he can't. The 'concentration camp guard' remarks, ridiculous comments about the Rueben brothers. Although, was he drunk at the time? Is he an alcoholic?

When he gives extremists a platform (ignoring moderate Muslims, women, gay rights campaigners) he doesn't inspire confidence. Even people like Peter Tatchell who once supported him (and stood as an independent Livingstone supporter) have deserted him, publicly condemning Livingstone.

There's the cronyism... and whilst there's dozens of his employees on enormous £100k+ salaries, tube fares are going up and up. Livingstone has been in office too long. I don't really care if it's Paddick or Boris, as long as Livingstone doesn't win. That said - I think he will, it'll be close but I'd be surprised if Boris wins.

Former Member

Disillusioned wrote: »

But he can't. The 'concentration camp guard' remarks, ridiculous comments about the Rueben brothers. Although, was he drunk at the time? Is he an alcoholic?

When he gives extremists a platform (ignoring moderate Muslims, women, gay rights campaigners) he doesn't inspire confidence. Even people like Peter Tatchell who once supported him (and stood as an independent Livingstone supporter) have deserted him, publicly condemning Livingstone.

There's the cronyism... and whilst there's dozens of his employees on enormous £100k+ salaries, tube fares are going up and up. Livingstone has been in office too long. I don't really care if it's Paddick or Boris, as long as Livingstone doesn't win. That said - I think he will, it'll be close but I'd be surprised if Boris wins.

We need rid of Ken. There have been some improvements but the whole bashing of the motorist under the pretence of 'saving the environment' has me fuming. He's a lying, cheating shit who never gives the whole figures. He said the charge would never rise above £5 when first introduced, for example. Also - who exactly has he/TFL consulted?! I live in Central London andI have many friends who also do, and not one of us has ever been consulted about these matters - even though we are all registered to 'have our say' and to be informed of uncoming changes etc etc.

Public transport - prices constantly going up, but I really haven't seen much improvement (and yes, I use it every day). A fresh lick of paint here and there does not constitute people being charged £4 a single trip in zone 1. Yes, I know it's cheaper with Oystercard, but visitors don't know this etc.

Seems he is happy enough to be flying off round the world, running up thousands of tonnes of CO2 and yet people have to pay a fortune to drive their cars, which, going on the report that they used themselves, won't make fuck all positive difference, but actually make it worse!

No, enough is enough. He has been in power long enough now. I stand fully behind Porsche on this one.



Taken from http://www.porschejudicialreview.co.uk/news.php

London Mayor Ken Livingstone is planning to raise the congestion charge from just £8.00 a day to £25.00 for some vehicles from October, and remove the exemption for residents, meaning that some people will see their daily charge rise from just 80p a day to £25.00 a day.

The new rules will affect several hundred models and many makes of car ? 33,000 cars daily in total. This includes many larger family cars such as larger people carriers.

Porsche believes this will be bad for London and intends to take legal action in the form of a Judicial Review to stop this. This is yet another tax on London and the motorist.

It is a disproportionately large, unfair increase.

? The over 200 per cent increase for non-residents is disproportionately
large? it is a huge jump in one go that looks more like a political stunt
to raise revenue for an inefficient system than considered action.

? The jump for people who actually live in the congestion zone is even higher. People who currently pay just 80p a day will now have to pay £25.00 a day ? a massive and unexpected increase of over 3000 percent.

? This increase will hit a large proportion of families that drive people carriers ? the sort of people who use one large car, rather than driving a series of smaller ones.

? It will cost nearly £6,000 per year for those people, whether resident or not, to drive in London every day. This is a massive additional cost that people would not have known they were going to have to face when they bought their car.

? Motorists in Britain already pay very high levels of fuel tax and road tax.
This is yet a further increase which will squeeze them even further.

It won?t benefit the environment.

? Despite Mr Livingstone's claims, the increased charge won't make any meaningful difference to the environment. The CO2 saved in a whole year is the equivalent, at most, to just a few hours of emissions from Heathrow Airport.

? It risks just putting more cars on the road as families move from one large car to two or more smaller ones.

? The increased charge will not be dependent on actual usage. A person
driving a few hundred yards in one of the affected cars would have
to pay £25.00 a day, whilst someone driving a slightly smaller car all
day long would get away with paying just £8.00, or just 80p if they are a
resident.

It sends out the wrong message about London as a place to do business.

? When London is competing to become the world?s leading business centre, it sends out completely the wrong message and will make successful people look at other cities to locate.

? The increase will hit large numbers of ordinary small business people who also use their vehicles for work.

? It comes at a time when people are already concerned about the state of the economy and when business centres should be doing all they can to secure their position.

Porsche has written to the Mayor requesting that he review his plans to increase the congestion charge to £25.00 for some vehicles. If he refuses to think more about the plans, Porsche will formally apply to the High Court for a Judicial Review. Porsche is not prepared to sit by and watch a world class city indiscriminately damaged.

April 09 2008

Revealed: TfL-commissioned research shows £25 C-Charge will increase CO2 by 182,000 tonnes

A report from King?s College never publicly released by Transport for London and only discovered following a specific request reveals that Mayor Ken Livingstone?s new emissions-related congestion charge is estimated by TfL?s own consultants to increase CO2 in Greater London by 182,000 tonnes. This not only contradicts the Mayor?s claims that his charge will reduce CO2 but also directly contradicts claims made by Transport for London.

In a report prepared for TfL by King?s College London?s ?Environmental Research Group? which used models to assess the impact of the new charge on emissions, the new charge is predicted to create a ?very high disbenefit? not only for CO2 but also for NOx, NO2 and PM10, all crucial air quality components.

In fact, the King?s report shows that should the Mayor?s proposal go ahead there will be an increase in CO2 emitted in Greater London in each year from 2009. By 2012, research shows that in Outer London the increase in CO2 will be nearly 184,000 tonnes with just 2,200 tonnes saved in Central London giving a net increase of 182,000 tonnes. The report indicates that the increase is largely caused by increased car mileage outside of the congestion charging zone as a result of the new charge. These findings directly contradict both Mayor Livingstone?s and TfL?s claims.

All figures previously publicly released by TfL with regard to the impact of the new charge on CO2 emissions, including during the consultation process, related only to the position within the congestion charge zone. TfL has never publicly released estimates taking into account the effect on the whole of Greater London. Instead, they suggested in their ?Report to the Mayor following consultation? that the position in Greater London was difficult to assess; other documents provided to the Mayor accepted that if the position outside the congestion charge zone was considered, then this ?could reduce the CO2 benefits?. Not only does the King?s report assess the position, it makes clear that it could be far worse than merely a reduction in CO2 ? in fact, it predicts a significant increase in CO2.

Commenting on the release of this report, Andy Goss, Managing Director of Porsche Cars GB, said, ?We always knew the environmental impact of this unfair tax would be minimal, now we know it will make matters worse. The Mayor and TfL need to explain why this report was not disclosed and why they want to increase taxes on motorists that will increase CO2.?

This research was in part used by TfL as they took the figures from the King?s report for NOx and PM10 directly from it; however, its findings in relation to CO2 emissions were not revealed and the full report has never before been released.

The King?s report estimates the total impact on CO2 in both Central and Outer London and shows that ?most of the emissions impacts happen in the outer location and this is a direct result of the high car traffic flow in the outer zone and the change of the vehicle km in this location.? Because of this new charge, drivers are likely to increase their mileage outside of and around the zone and thus increase their emissions.

?It seems absolutely clear that the report shows that not only have Mayor Livingstone and TfL not presented all of the information to the public about the impact of his £25 charge but that they have also created a new tax on motorists that will do the exact opposite of its stated goal,? Goss continued.

I am trying to find an online link to an article in Autocar with regards to the Low Emission Zone (LEZ) that is now in force. The technology is exactly the same, bar a software change, to the CC charge systems, and IBM (who implemented the LEZ) have now been hired to run the whole thing. They could step up the whole of Greater London into a giant toll system by little more than a flick of a switch.

Former Member

Extending it to Kensington and Chelsea was just a tax grab too - and old fashioned hate the rich socialism at that. (And as Livingstone knows, not everybody in Kensington and Chelsea can afford the tax).

Former Member

Disillusioned wrote: »

Extending it to Kensington and Chelsea was just a tax grab too - and old fashioned hate the rich socialism at that. (And as Livingstone knows, not everybody in Kensington and Chelsea can afford the tax).

Exactly. It was VERY unfair. There are few people I would like to give a slap to, but he is right up there.

He just does what he wants, and nobody seems to dare challenge this. This is why I am behind Porsche on this one and I am hoping more manufacturers get involved.

Hell, a 2.0l Vauxhall Zafira falls foul of his new £25 charge. How the FUCK is that a gas guzzler, and people only buy something like that when they need it - like when they have a family.

He thinks using the term gas guzzler will have everybody onside, but the more figures come out, the more people are pissed off with what he is doing. It doesn't just affect 4x4s as he loves to make out, it affects a hell of a lot of people.

I think this sums up his nonsense quite well:

Despite Mr Livingstone's claims, the increased charge won't make any meaningful difference to the environment. The CO2 saved in a whole year is the equivalent, at most, to just a few hours of emissions from Heathrow Airport.

Former Member

I would vote for Ken. Shudder to think what would happen if Boris got in

Former Member

Calvin wrote: »

I would vote for Ken. Shudder to think what would happen if Boris got in

This is the problem. Boris is such a numpty that it is hard to consciously head to vote for him...

Just as long as Ken doesn't get back in.

Former Member

I think I read somewhere Gordon Brown (who absolutely hates Ken Livingstone) wouldn't mind the idea of Boris winning - because he is rather prone to blunders.

That said, I think Boris would be better than Livingstone. (Although, I think Brian Paddick would be the most capable).

Former Member

g_angel wrote: »

This is the problem. Boris is such a numpty that it is hard to consciously head to vote for him...

Just as long as Ken doesn't get back in.

Boris has a problem where I suppose many people will say they will vote for him, but when they get into the polling station, cant bring themselves to vote for this guy to run London.

I think when it comes to it people will vote for what they know and that will play to Kens advantage.

And of course if Ken is re-elected I stand to make over £300

Former Member

Disillusioned wrote: »

I think I read somewhere Gordon Brown (who absolutely hates Ken Livingstone) wouldn't mind the idea of Boris winning - because he is rather prone to blunders.

That said, I think Boris would be better than Livingstone. (Although, I think Brian Paddick would be the most capable).

At least with Boris you would be guaranteed some entertainment along the way

Former Member

Calvin wrote: »

Boris has a problem where I suppose many people will say they will vote for him, but when they get into the polling station, cant bring themselves to vote for this guy to run London.

I think when it comes to it people will vote for what they know and that will play to Kens advantage.

And of course if Ken is re-elected I stand to make over £300

It's gonna be hard, but I want shut of Ken so badly that I will be forcing myself to vote for The Posh Buffoon.

If Brian Paddick was on a firmer foothold, he would have my vote. It's a two horse race, unfortunately...

Former Member

Calvin wrote: »

And of course if Ken is re-elected I stand to make over £300

On Betfair I saw Boris is favourite, 1.62 and Livingstone outsider at 2.7. Odds for Livingstone are very generous I think!

Former Member

Disillusioned wrote: »

On Betfair I saw Boris is favourite, 1.62 and Livingstone outsider at 2.7. Odds for Livingstone are very generous I think!

I know, i got better odds on Ken than that . I just gotta feeling Ken is going to pull it off at the last moment for the simple reason, i dont know how many people will turn their intention to vote for Boris into an actual vote on the day.

Former Member

All intersting stuff ...which makes me even happier i live on the edge of nowhwere. This and the London olympics is realy bringing it home to me that London is seriously remote from most of the UK ...financialy and politicaly. Your a distant nation that brings food and economic aid to us bumpkins.

Former Member

Randomgirl wrote: »

I'm going to be voting for Red Ken :yes:

Me too. Daren't split the anti-Boris vote.

Former Member

I made Ken Livingstone a clay snail when I was in the day hospital. Ken likes mental health patients. And gay rights. And helping people on benefits. These are issues I care about. Also he wants to make the freedom passes for the elderly work at peak times too.

Former Member

g_angel wrote: »

Also - who exactly has he/TFL consulted?! I live in Central London andI have many friends who also do, and not one of us has ever been consulted about these matters - even though we are all registered to 'have our say' and to be informed of uncoming changes etc etc.

I was consulted about the west extension of the C-Charge, I said yes it should be extended!

Former Member

Randomgirl wrote: »

I was consulted about the west extension of the C-Charge, I said yes it should be extended!

I have never met a person, face to face, that was been consulted. I wonder if he only consults people who don't drive (not that all my friends have cars...)?

So - what were your reasons behind supporting the extension? It was utterly unfair and just a tax grab.

Former Member

The problem with the Western extension is that residents were suddenly allowed to drive across the entire CC zone paying the 90% discount rates. That should have not been the case.

Former Member

Aladdin wrote: »

The problem with the Western extension is that residents were suddenly allowed to drive across the entire CC zone paying the 90% discount rates. That should have not been the case.

So... there should be TWO congestion zones?!

Former Member

g_angel wrote: »

It's gonna be hard, but I want shut of Ken so badly that I will be forcing myself to vote for The Posh Buffoon.

If Brian Paddick was on a firmer foothold, he would have my vote. It's a two horse race, unfortunately...

You can still vote for him as your second preference though.

Former Member

Runnymede wrote: »

You can still vote for him as your second preference though.

I will certainly be doing that then.

Former Member

g_angel wrote: »

So... there should be TWO congestion zones?!

There should be one, but by allowing hundreds of thousands of K&C residents to drive all across central London for next to nothing, much of the gains obtained in the area covered by the first CC zone were lost.

While out-of-towners are still discouraged from driving into town by the CC charge, you have several hundred thousand drivers who previously had to pay £8 to drive into Westminser, the West End etc, suddenly able to drive there for a few pence. That's encouraging driving, not discouraging it.

Former Member

Aladdin wrote: »

There should be one, but by allowing hundreds of thousands of K&C residents to drive all across central London for next to nothing, much of the gains obtained in the area covered by the first CC zone were lost.

While out-of-towners are still discouraged from driving into town by the CC charge, you have several hundred thousand drivers who previously had to pay £8 to drive into Westminser, the West End etc, suddenly able to drive there for a few pence. That's encouraging driving, not discouraging it.

I follow you now. Agreed, if there HAS to be one, there should be one smaller one. The original one, at £5 a day. As it was supposed to be, and was supposed to stay.

Ken = Cunt.

Former Member

Were I entitled to vote in the London mayoral election, I really would struggle to know where to cast my ballot. Let's get one thing out of the way - I wouldn't vote for Livingstone in a million years. I'm not going to vote for a man who has faced allegations of corruption, cronyism, anti-Semitism and worse during his many years in politics. The sooner the world has gotten rid of class-envious champagne socialists like Red Ken, the better.

Mind you, I wouldn't vote for Boris Johnson either. Would you honestly trust such an idiotic man with the keys to the capital? I'd rather have an amoeba in charge - cue protests from amoebas rights groups. For possibly the first time ever, I'd have to cast my vote for... shudder... the Liberal Democrat candidate.

As I say, thank god I'm not entitled to vote in this.

Former Member

stargalaxy wrote: »

I'm not going to vote for a man who has faced allegations of corruption, cronyism, anti-Semitism and worse during his many years in politics.

You wouldn't vote for someone who has been in politics for more than 25 years who has had allegations made against them.

Looks like you wouldn't be able to vote for anyone mate!

Also, I'd be interested to know what the "worse" allegations were. Also somewhat bewildering to see the anti-semitism charge thrown up again. :rolleyes: