If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Ken effing Livingstone
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
How the hell did Ken Livingstone slip through the net and get voted in as Mayor of London!!! (Alright I do know)
I think it is shocking that his plans to charge motorists £5 to drive into central London, will go ahead.
He says he will plug it back into public transport - Yeah right! London public transport is crap and no matter how much money you put into it - it will take years to be of a high standard and while we wait for that we'll have to have miserable journeys.
Am I the only person to feel like this?:mad: :mad:
I think it is shocking that his plans to charge motorists £5 to drive into central London, will go ahead.
He says he will plug it back into public transport - Yeah right! London public transport is crap and no matter how much money you put into it - it will take years to be of a high standard and while we wait for that we'll have to have miserable journeys.
Am I the only person to feel like this?:mad: :mad:
0
Comments
However, there is also a number of people who will drive their own cars to work out of laziness. These people simply do not want to use public transport. They prefer to travel door-to-door in the comfort of their own vehicles, and they don't like walking. This, for a congested city like London, is a rather selfish thing to do. So long as businesses and other people who really need to use their cars are exempt, I don't see anything wrong with the £5 charge. The money will definitively be welcome by our cash-strapped transport system, and I believe this will encourage many to use traffic transport. However this should be complemented with improved and more frequent services on the Tube and trains. In reality those long suffering commuters will face even more crammed carriages and delays once the charge is imposed.
I would advice people to buy a cheap bike. I've been travelling to work in a scooter for a year and a half now, and it's absolute bliss. Journeys to my work take less than 20 minutes (as opposed to 1 and a quarter hours), there is free parking everywhere in London for bikes, and considering that a travelcard to zone 3 cost me £960 per year, a bike will pay for itself within 2 years.
Will Scooters be exempt to the charges?
What you are fighting for is not hat the idea is bad but that you just want to carry on with the ease of car travel
Why not give it a chance - something good may come of it, if people have to use public transport then the money will be put into the improvements!
Presenta i scooter e gli autisti pericolosi italiano!
‘Give it a chance’ didn’t Margaret Thatcher say that about poll tax!
I think congestion charging is a good idea; the traffic in London is totally out of control, and leads to poor air quality, health risks and damage to historic buildings. A £5 charge will reduce the levels of traffic and provide a good income which I genuinely believe will be put into improved public transport, but it does take time.
Have you ever got out of your car and actually used it? The Underground is safe, reliable, fast, widespread and reasonably priced. The same pretty much goes for buses, although they do have to contend with the traffic. In comparison with the majority of this country, and indeed much of the world, London's public transport network is first class.
Ken Livingstone's fight to stop the part-privatisation of the Underground is something that I strongly support, as do the overwhelming majority of Londoners. Had Dobson or Norris been elected, it probably would have already gone through and the Underground would be starting to resemble the national rail service.
big Apology for the lazy comment.
I'm going to start using public transport to get to work next week (Train) - last time I used it consistently was when I lived in London for 18 months, the tube was great the buses weren't but what I'm saying is that perhaps by putting the money raised into public transport then things will get better!
I don't use it at the moment because I've spent the last 4 years cycling 4 miles to and from work in all weathers and if I wasn't moving a bit furhter away I would carry on cycling.
Yes..I do remember the Poll tax! I was on the first marches thank you.
I think this is a bit overstatement.. I use the underground and just using the example of today - Victoria line ran late and people were crowded on the platform this morning, inside the train was smelly and hot.
London public transport is not the worst in the world but certainly not first class - if you go to some European countries you might possibly agree.
Then I am not a PPP supporter but I'm not sure if charging drivers simply to use the roads is fair.
OK but what about this....
Get into your car, its hot and sweaty ... but you're on my own so you don't have to worry once you've opened the windows, no worries that there are 4 spare spaces you can fill.. Drive down the road...total gridlock...moan about the traffic, the radio informs you it's jammed for 6 miles. HHHRRRMMPPHHH...but it's OK because you're in YOUR car doing YOUR thing and fuck the planet..who cares.
All Ken is doing is trying to make people a bit more responsible.
I travel to London frequently and love the Underground. Trains come every 2-3 mins (or so) and are reasonably clean. The only station I have visited which I didn't like much was Elephant and Castle - but that was due to the ricketty old lift system. I hate lifts.
I really do think that it would help if some Londoners actually set foot outside their fair city and had a look at the rest of the country. You really haven't got it that bad.
With regards the Victoria Line, I also had a problem when some signals went down a few weeks ago. Is it really THAT big a problem? So i was a little delayed, and had to change route, but then that could happen if I was in a car too...
I don't know how often you travel at rush hour, but the Underground is not good. Delays most days, packed out most days, and extremely uncomfortable. I'm amazed more people aren't taken ill on the Underground. Trains are not any better either.
You may have had a signal failure a few weeks ago, but to be honest, it is a major problem, because it doesn't happen every few weeks. It happens every couple of days, if not more often. And in the rush hour you can then not get on a bus, not get a taxi, not get an overground train because it's so packed.
The Underground works, but it's certainly not first class, and even when the trains are running on time the conditions are appalling. Overcrowding, very hot, smelly. It's been like it for so long people just accept it, plus the fact that there is no real alternative for most people. But it's certainly not in a good state.
Personally I wouldn't criticise anyone who chose to drive to work rather than use public transport. They're entitled to get to work in some sort of comfort. If the public transport system was in any way reasonable then maybe you'd have a point, but I don't see why anyone should cram themselves on the Tube in conditions that would be deemed cruel if cattle were transported that way, if they've got another option.
I wonder if anyone realises what it is like to get on a tube to go to work and to be gassed on the platform, causing streaming eyes and nose, not being able to breath and disorientation – it was extremely frightening.
This happened to me (and about 150 others) last month at 8.30am on the Northern Line. It took LU 3 days to inform me what the gas was. In the meantime I had to sit and wait wondering what had gone into my system as the doctor needed to know.
Hence I will be purchasing a car.
Good move. I mean, its not like cars release any noxious fumes is it?
:rolleyes:
:rolleyes:
We'll have the privelege of being charged for driving into London when everyone else drives out. IE not on the congested side of the road.
We will be making sure as many journeys will be taken inside the zone to ensure we get our moneys worth for having the cheek to return home after trip away from the city :mad:
Too true MOK. Try Birmingham. Buses scheduled at 1 every 5 minutes, you're lucky if you get one in half an hour. Trains to Stratford, 1 a fucking hour and they finish at about 7pm. Buses finish about midnight. Appaling state of buses and trains, rarely cleaned and old stock. Every time i've been to London, i've always been impressed by public transport there. Compared to what i use, it's quicker, cleaner, cheaper and they at least give their staff a decent level of training. All you get in Birmingham is "Aint my fucking fault is it?" or "You can always walk":rolleyes:
90% reduction apparently. Which makes it a whole whopping 50p.
Its typical of this country in that when anyone tries to get people out of the car onto public transport than its suddenly evil. Sod the fact that its killing the planet, economically as much as anything. Sod the fact that high levels of carbon monoxide and diesel particles cause asthma, damage antique buildings, and generally damage the environment. Its all about the fact that people are too fucking lazy to catch public transport.
As for overcrowding...deal with it. When they try to put commuter fares up to ease congestion everyone complains, when they have to run the railway lines at 100% capacity meaning that even the slightest delay snowballs as there is no give in the system, everyone complains.
Londoners especially expect everything to be handed out to them on a plate. Theres no other way that people will leave the car at home, so this is the only solution. At the very worst itll mean people will have to car-pool uinstead of all tarvelling in by themselves.
Diddums.
I honestly didn't know it was that low.
Although the fact that those in yorkshire are more informed than those it effects doesn't suprise me at all. as were being kept in the dark around here.
I think you're missing the point here. No-one is saying that trying to get people onto public transport is evil. In theory, I suspect most people agree there should be less cars, and more use of public transport. I know I do. The point is that the public transport is not good enough to support this idea.
Deal with overcrowding? How? It's packed, it's disgusting. By deal with it do you mean continue going to work via public transport? Well, people do, because most don't have a choice. Adding a load of extra commuters who used to drive is just going to make things worse.
How does putting up commuter fares ease congestion? Everybody who used it before will continue to use but will just have to pay more. The reason people complain is because fares go up when the service is still very poor. If fares go up, you expect to see an improvement somewhere, but there isn't. If prices went up for anything else without a corresponding improvement in service you'd complain too.
How do Londoner's expect everything handed to them on a plate? What are you basing this on? The reason people in London complain about public transport is because it's not very good, and there's no sign of it improving.
The problem with the £5 toll system is that it's coming at the problem from the wrong way. Before that will work, the public transport system needs to be better. Therefore the idea that you charge this first, then improve the public transport is the wrong way round. The system needs to be improved, and then you should charge the money. You need to give people a viable option. No doubt there are selfish and lazy people who'd use their cars whatever (still their right I'd say) but a lot of people would be using their cars at the moment because the alternative is not up to scratch.
Secondly, something brought up earlier - take a look outside London. What you actually have is a very efficient public transport system which isn't as dirty of smelly as you make out. I use it regularly and the occasional inconvenience is made up by the fact that there are several routes I can take to most destinations, and that even on the "awful" Tube, the trains tend to run every two minues or so.
So it costs £1k for a season ticket on public transport. Hwo does this compare to making that same journey by car. How much is it to park everyday in NCP? Petrol prices, car tax, insurance etc I know that you may use you car for personal trip too, but doesn't your season ticket cover this as well?
I think that Kermit had it spot on with his "diddums" comment. You really don't have it that bad. You just have a very insular view.
The 'you don't have to live in London...' point is irrelevant to what we're talking about and ridiculous and you know it. I do live here. It's where I'm from. It's where my job is. Where do you suggest I live?
I don't know how often you use the Tube, or what transport is like where you are. I can only comment on my experience. And while the network coverage is very good, with different routes etc, the delays are not occasional. They are frequent. As mentioned previously, there are delays on my line almost every other day. Some major, some minor. And maybe you do have different routes to take - not everyone has that luxury.
I don't think the Underground is any more dirty than any other system. It's fairly clean I'd say. It's the overcrowding in rush hour that cause most of the problems. The people cause it to smell bad, but that's not the major concern. The fact that you can't get on trains when they come in because they're too packed is a problem. The fact that stations get closed because of overcrowding is a problem. Again as mentioned before, people travel on tubes crushed against the doors and each other. If cattle were transported like that there would be an outcry. It is not a dignified or civilised way to travel.
Most of the problems on the tube are caused by so many people using it, which is why it's more civilised during the day. Which begs the question do we really want to encourage more people to use it, without improving it first?
I think you may have missed Adam's point about the cost of the season ticket (apologies if I'm wrong) but it's not about comparing it to the cost of a car. If you pay £1,000 a year for a service, you've got a right to expect a decent service. I don't think Londoner's get their money's worth on the Underground.
So overall your point is that the Underground doesn't need improving, and we should be happy with what we've got? I think you'd be hard-pushed to find anyone else who regularly uses the Underground to say it doesn't need improving, including all politicians. Never mind the fact that we should always try to improve things. The fact is the underground has not been improved for around 40 years or more. Which implies it's pretty out-dated.
I do agree that public transport needs some improvement, but I also think that Londoners expect a little too much.
Capacity is a problem, as you say rush hour means overcrowding, but there I think you have the salient point. Rush hour always means overcrowding, regardless of what means of transport you choose to use. The only real way to increase capacity is to build new routes with new stations. The fact that the trains already travel every two minutes (or so) means that you cannot put anymore on the line, therefore you need more lines. the cost of which would be astronomical, surely Londoners wouldn't expect the nation as a whole to pick up such cost therefore it would be down to you.
I'm a regular user of the Victoria line, and have encountered several delays, most notably during rush hour. But then I have also tried driving into London as an alternative. The fact that I now choose to use public transport tells you a story.
I live in Kent, we have ONE bus company, and ONE train company. Neither of these offer anything approaching the service which is offered in London. When you consider that many of my fellow Kent resident pay over £2k to travel into London everyday, only to have to stand for the two hour journey :eek:
It is so easy to get around London and the cost isn't that prohibitive, when compared to other options. And that comparison is important.
I'm not sure where to start.
Your point about choice is irrelevant. Why isn't that obvious to you? We're talking about the state of London's public transport, not where I choose to live. Or are you suggesting everybody moves out of London. (And clearly the fact that this has always been my home, and where my job is, doesn't seem to hold much water with you). Why don't you move away from Kent if London's transport is so much better than yours? See, a facetious point.
Overcrowding exacerbates the problem, but it isn't the problem in itself. The trains break down, and there are constant signal failures. The reason for these is the age of the system. It all needs updating and improving, and because of the delays we are not getting our money's worth. These failures also contribute to the immense overcrowding on many of the lines. The Victoria Line is by no means the worst.
The comparison between driving is irrelevant. I too wouldn't choose to drive into London. But people do, and that's their right, particularly with the state of the underground. To be honest, I don't want them all to use the tube until it improves, because it will just make matters worse.
The cost is not really the point. I would happily pay my money and not complain if I was getting a decent service.
And although I'm sure there are bad systems around the country, I'm not sure you can compare the transport system in London with anything other than other transport systems in major cities. They're not really like for like.
And anyway, to be honest I couldn't care less what transport is like elsewhere. So it's shit where you are - is that supposed to make me feel better about the poor service I get. I shouldn't complain because it's worse elsewhere? Well, worse things happen at sea, so we should all shut up right? If it's shit everywhere we should all complain, not all shut up.
So the two aren't connected? The fact that you choose to live and work within London has no effect on you needing to use London's public transport then?
Not sure why this tangent, but no this isn't what I suggested. If you choose to live and work in an area of high population density, you cannot complain about fact that there are lots of people wanting to use the same services as you do.
Er...perhaps because I am willing to live with the consequences of my personal choices.
The major cause of overcrowding is the number of people who want to use the service. Why do they choose to use the service?
Yes, trains break down. It happens and even new trains would do so. As do cars, buses and any other form of transportation.
You talk about not getting your money's worth. Well, where should the additional funding required to update the system come from? You know that you aren't talking small numbers here so who should fund the massive increase that would be required to achieve this aim.
Isn't that what PPP is all about (and no, I don't really support the system suggested), but apart from private finance, where else can the funding come from?
The comparison is very relevant because it one of the alternative options. When considering transport it is foolish to look at each in isolation, because of the effect each has on the others. Look at the traffic problems during a rail strike.
So why was the cost brought up, if it isn't relevant?
For the cost that exists to date, you do get a very good service - for £1k per year you can travel on the Tube at any time throughout the day. That equates to £3 per day. Hardly excessive is it? What do you expect for that, other than a service which gets you to your destination - the majority of times whithout much fuss. Not bad when you consider the number of people having to be transported at any time.
You are right, they aren't. One gets massive attention.
Can't hear the people of Manchester shouting too much about their services, can you?
Not at all, but equally I don't think that you should expect so much national concern (on a national forum) about what is in effect a reasonable service, when compared to the rest of the country.
Feel free to complain, just don't get upset when other people point out that really you have little to complain about.