ChatterBank38 mins ago
Jeremy Corbyn Thinking About Running For London Mayor
Rejected by Labour, as a loose end Independent with no guarantee of re-election, Mr Corbyn says he thinking about the Mayor's job.
https:/
Meanwhile, current Mayor Sadiq Khan's future plans for long-suffering motorists revealed In an interview with the Financial Times a couple of months ago, he describes as 'potentially quite exciting'
Exciting for whom?. The people who take care of the coffers?
https:/
Lucky Londoners. Spoilt for choice.
https:/
Meanwhile, current Mayor Sadiq Khan's future plans for long-suffering motorists revealed In an interview with the Financial Times a couple of months ago, he describes as 'potentially quite exciting'
Exciting for whom?. The people who take care of the coffers?
https:/
Lucky Londoners. Spoilt for choice.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Your evidence that he's doing it out of concern for the planet hasn't been forthcoming either, untitled. It's a good excuse. This man is forcing motorists who don't have the right vehicle to pay £27.50 (I think that's right) to drive in central London, and 12.50 to drive on the outskirts extending out to surrounding counties. And it's more for van and lorry drivers. What a wonderful effect that will have on businesses that will necessarily have to increase prices to cover this charge, which in turn negatively affects the cost of living for everyone! Prop his coffers up and everyone pays - whether they have a car or not. Don't tell me it's not about money. It is.
Don't tell me it's not about money. It is.
it is not about money: it is about clean air.
I asked naomi for proof of this and predictably got nothing... do you have any? - (that Khans intentions are bad even if the acts are good)
god are we still stuck at that? it is AB: of course we are.
You have since Khan has not admitted it, conclude from his actions. ( bit like Trump - you have to prove he knew he had lost when he was saying he had won).
and even for an ABer you have to be a bit of a durr if you say " I am doing ULEZ for moolah, and it is nothing to do with clean air"
it is not about money: it is about clean air.
I asked naomi for proof of this and predictably got nothing... do you have any? - (that Khans intentions are bad even if the acts are good)
god are we still stuck at that? it is AB: of course we are.
You have since Khan has not admitted it, conclude from his actions. ( bit like Trump - you have to prove he knew he had lost when he was saying he had won).
and even for an ABer you have to be a bit of a durr if you say " I am doing ULEZ for moolah, and it is nothing to do with clean air"
"Your evidence that he's doing it out of concern for the planet hasn't been forthcoming either, untitled"
well strictly speaking i asked you first naomi but LEZ already succeeded in reducing nitrogen oxide levels in central london by an estimated 46% and has dramatically increased the proportion of compliant vehicles... cleaner air benefits everyone who lives in london.
https:/
khan insists that your allegation is untrue... so am i asking quite reasonably for your proof that he isn't telling the truth on that subject... i suspect if you had it you would have posted it rather than turning the question on me... unless you actually do provide anything I'm going to just assume you haven't anything
well strictly speaking i asked you first naomi but LEZ already succeeded in reducing nitrogen oxide levels in central london by an estimated 46% and has dramatically increased the proportion of compliant vehicles... cleaner air benefits everyone who lives in london.
https:/
khan insists that your allegation is untrue... so am i asking quite reasonably for your proof that he isn't telling the truth on that subject... i suspect if you had it you would have posted it rather than turning the question on me... unless you actually do provide anything I'm going to just assume you haven't anything
Untitled, this from last year.
https:/
This is what the Department of Transport said.
“We’re aware that TfL are still feeling the aftereffects of the pandemic, but it is the mayor’s responsibility to accelerate overdue reforms that will ensure TfL becomes financially sustainable in a way that is fair to taxpayers.”
I'm not convinced in the slightest that his taxes on motorists are fair, but if he wants to keep the business alive a poor manager has to get money from wherever he can I guess.
https:/
This is what the Department of Transport said.
“We’re aware that TfL are still feeling the aftereffects of the pandemic, but it is the mayor’s responsibility to accelerate overdue reforms that will ensure TfL becomes financially sustainable in a way that is fair to taxpayers.”
I'm not convinced in the slightest that his taxes on motorists are fair, but if he wants to keep the business alive a poor manager has to get money from wherever he can I guess.
And something else for you to ponder, untitled.
//Expansion of London’s Ultra-Low Emission Zone has boosted TfL’s income by almost £100m // says the RAC.
https:/
And that's before the newly-planned far wider expansion.
//Expansion of London’s Ultra-Low Emission Zone has boosted TfL’s income by almost £100m // says the RAC.
https:/
And that's before the newly-planned far wider expansion.
the fall in tfl’s funding was due to a drop in passenger numbers during the pandemic which has now almost entirely recovered… i don’t see any information which even suggests that the ULEZ expansion is not motivated by environmental concerns
why shouldn’t those who drive polluting cars pay something toward the costs of the air pollution they cause? londoners are more than entitled to expect action to improve air quality.
why shouldn’t those who drive polluting cars pay something toward the costs of the air pollution they cause? londoners are more than entitled to expect action to improve air quality.
Hmmm … not what you wanted to hear then, Untitled. No surprise. Perhaps you'll show me where I can find information saying that all future profits will go towards environmental concerns.
//why shouldn’t those who drive polluting cars pay something toward the costs of the air pollution they cause?//
Firstly, it's utterly unreasonable to expect ordinary people to go out and buy new cars - stupid in fact because they simply can't afford it - and that's coming from one of those awful uncaring Conservatives - me. Secondly they're already paying. The Congestion Charge has been in operation for some time now - and the ULEZ charge has been added to surrounding areas - and is now expanding out further into surrounding counties. Load of dosh to be screwed out of people if you know where to look, Untitled, and that 'something' you mention costs up to £27.50 ... per day! Think how happy you'd be in that situation. Doubtless you'd pay it with pleasure. All in a good cause - and all that.
//why shouldn’t those who drive polluting cars pay something toward the costs of the air pollution they cause?//
Firstly, it's utterly unreasonable to expect ordinary people to go out and buy new cars - stupid in fact because they simply can't afford it - and that's coming from one of those awful uncaring Conservatives - me. Secondly they're already paying. The Congestion Charge has been in operation for some time now - and the ULEZ charge has been added to surrounding areas - and is now expanding out further into surrounding counties. Load of dosh to be screwed out of people if you know where to look, Untitled, and that 'something' you mention costs up to £27.50 ... per day! Think how happy you'd be in that situation. Doubtless you'd pay it with pleasure. All in a good cause - and all that.
with pleasure? no i would probably be quite annoyed… but i am not foolish enough to mistake being annoyed about something for a coherent political stance!!
better air quality means better health for londoners and that is a good thing for everyone. some people are going to complain short term but it is worth it. it is quite refreshing to see a politician take a long term view for once.
better air quality means better health for londoners and that is a good thing for everyone. some people are going to complain short term but it is worth it. it is quite refreshing to see a politician take a long term view for once.
A long term view of his coffers, untitled. That where his focus is firmly fixed.
You have given no rational thought to this whatsoever and that's because it doesn't suit your politics to do so. Not a word about how ordinary people will be able to afford it. I'd bet my boots that a lot of them are worried sick - and understandably so.
You have given no rational thought to this whatsoever and that's because it doesn't suit your politics to do so. Not a word about how ordinary people will be able to afford it. I'd bet my boots that a lot of them are worried sick - and understandably so.
There is no roof whatsoever that "pollution" from vehicles has ever caused any illnesses. ULEZ and other similar schemes around the country are just an excuse to tax working people. Mad Sad and others like him are just walking with their heads in the clouds looking for Utopia whilst singing "Imagine" by John Lennon.
people have been complaining about the quality of air in london for years… are they not ordinary? 10CS claim that there is no proof of air quality causing health problems is simply false…
“ You have given no rational thought to this whatsoever and that's because it doesn't suit your politics to do so”
and you have made completely unsubstantiated assertions about khan’s goals simply because you dislike and distrust him… I have demonstrated the benefits of ULEZ to everyone not just those who drive polluting vehicles
“ You have given no rational thought to this whatsoever and that's because it doesn't suit your politics to do so”
and you have made completely unsubstantiated assertions about khan’s goals simply because you dislike and distrust him… I have demonstrated the benefits of ULEZ to everyone not just those who drive polluting vehicles
Where is the proof that emissions from vehicles are causing illnesses? There are only suppositions. It's got to be that hasn't it? It's got be vehicle emissions. It can't be anything else, can it? Mad Sad says so.
It's peoples' unhealthy lifestyles that are making them ill. Or, some people think they are always ill, when there's actually nothing wrong with them.
Does any user of this website actually know anyone who is currently ill because of vehicle emissions?
It's peoples' unhealthy lifestyles that are making them ill. Or, some people think they are always ill, when there's actually nothing wrong with them.
Does any user of this website actually know anyone who is currently ill because of vehicle emissions?
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles86 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles100 mins ago
Learn Cpr And First Aid Course In South...
Science105 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles107 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles126 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.