Boris ends cheap fares

[jake-the-peg]

http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idU KL2570113320080525

Boris Johnson has decided to kill the agreement that resulted in Londoners on income support getting cheap fares!

Was this in his manifesto?

Did Londoners know they were voting for this?

[New Judge]

As far as I know the new Mayor has not suggested he will scrap the congestion charge. He has said that the CC must be reformed and that he will not introduce the previous Mayor�s proposed �25 daily levy on some vehicles.

As for jake�s question, I do not believe this move was in the new Mayor�s manifesto. But neither was its introduction in Mayor Livingstone�s manifesto either. There is no justification for providing reduced fares for recipients of Income Support (especially when funded by a deal with a South American dictator). The benefits are assessed to enable them to afford their living expenses, including travel. Even if this had been in his manifesto I doubt it would have had a material effect on the outcome. Under Mayor Livingstone London�s fares were heading the way of prescription charges � where one fifth of the people pay five times as much as they should to fund the four fifths that pay nothing. Most Londoners, I think, had had enough of this.

However, the policy that contributed more than anything else towards making London�s buses virtually unusable in the suburbs has unfortunately not yet received the new mayor�s attention. This was to allow free travel for children at all times. This was done �to enable them to take advantage of the cultural and educational opportunities the capital has to offer�. Anyone who has travelled in outer London by bus in the evening may need educating themselves as they try to understand what cultural opportunities exist for the children at the back of the top deck whilst they smoke, drink, play loud music and etch the windows with their "tags".

It is clear from the level of support Boris received that Londoners felt they needed a change. Judging him on individual policy announcements will not determine whether their instincts were right any more than the Venezuelan deal alone brought about Livingstone�s downfall.

[RevFunk]

I have to laugh when there is a political change as people expect the new person/party to be any different to the last one!

People are crying about New Labour, like if/when the Tories get in it will be any different, people obviously forget 15% interest rates, 10% inflation, mass unemployemt etc etc.

Everyone is as bad as each other so just dont bother voting.

[ojread2]

Can't say I am political at all (in fact I have only read this Q because it came up in the recent post list lol) but why, when London fares are already subsidised do those on income support get their fares even cheaper? If they are attending an interview as I understand it they can claim back the whole fare anyway.

Have those in IS lost the use of their legs in some way? Those just on the threshold for any help have to pay and yet those who are getting everything free - rent, council tax, scripts, dentist etc - only have to pay half?

If Boris has done away with it, I for one agree with him and I will not apologise if that makes me unpopular

[New Judge]

Well, Rev the new mayor has evidently done something substantially different to his predecessor, as this post attests.

You may well be right when you say that, nationally, very little difference exists between the two main parties. However, in London, there was a clear difference in policies (mainly driven by ideologies) between the two principle contenders and Londoners made their choice. I expect, as time goes on, more policy announcements will make this even more evident.

I�m pleased you took an interest, ojread2 in an area that does not normally concern you. You are clearly quite astute in these matters and have immediately identified the injustice of the scheme which jake raised in his question.

This is but a small example of many similar outrages which are gradually beginning to stir the silent taxpaying majority who are funding these blatantly unfair schemes.