The Big 'Let's sell our cars and take buses/ebikes instead' thread (warning: probably very dull)
Comments
-
No idea, haven't been following it, I don't use a car in London and even if I did my car complies comfortably.Stevo_666 said:
So no comment from you on Khan and TFL misleading the public on ULEZ benefits?rick_chasey said:Just give stevo the "too early to tell" argument ;-) he's familiar with it.
I am generally anti-car in London and I know the pollution is constantly terrible where it is most sensible to either cycle or use public transport, so f*ck 'em. The car drivers don't give a sh!t about my health so I'm not inclined to care about their finances.0 -
rick_chasey said:
I am generally anti-car in London and I know the pollution is constantly terrible where it is most sensible to either cycle or use public transport, so f*ck 'em. The car drivers don't give a sh!t about my health so I'm not inclined to care about their finances.Stevo_666 said:
So no comment from you on Khan and TFL misleading the public on ULEZ benefits?rick_chasey said:Just give stevo the "too early to tell" argument ;-) he's familiar with it.
That's my general impression about the pro-carists whose moans about LTNs and inability to drive and park unhindered exactly where they want to pop up on FB all the time - they offer absolutely no solutions, are unable to conceive of any alternative, and utterly blind to the fact that there are simply too many people driving into/out of Exeter at peak times, despite (in many cases) good alternatives.0 -
That's the sort of snobbery I would really struggle to tolerate. Have you asked up which party hitchhikers vote for?rick_chasey said:
My MIL, mrs Brexit daily Mail, who cannot drive or cycle following a stroke, refuses on principal to take the bus as it’s for “labour voters”.pangolin said:6 minutes 20:
"Perfect travel conditions in central London, you've got tubes you've got trains you've got........ we simply don't have that out here, so people are absolutely compelled to use their cars"
*Camera cuts to bus going past*
Honestly, she would rather be entirely reliant on lifts from people.0 -
Doesn't change the fact that Khan stands accused of misleading the public. Wonder why quite a few people seem to be dodging the issue?rick_chasey said:
No idea, haven't been following it, I don't use a car in London and even if I did my car complies comfortably.Stevo_666 said:
So no comment from you on Khan and TFL misleading the public on ULEZ benefits?rick_chasey said:Just give stevo the "too early to tell" argument ;-) he's familiar with it.
I am generally anti-car in London and I know the pollution is constantly terrible where it is most sensible to either cycle or use public transport, so f*ck 'em. The car drivers don't give a sh!t about my health so I'm not inclined to care about their finances.
Btw the ULEZ boundary closest to me has farmers fields etc. Not even remotely urban."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
As a compromise, I'm happy if the ULEZ charge applies to all vehicles.Stevo_666 said:
Doesn't change the fact that Khan stands accused of misleading the public. Wonder why quite a few people seem to be dodging the issue?rick_chasey said:
No idea, haven't been following it, I don't use a car in London and even if I did my car complies comfortably.Stevo_666 said:
So no comment from you on Khan and TFL misleading the public on ULEZ benefits?rick_chasey said:Just give stevo the "too early to tell" argument ;-) he's familiar with it.
I am generally anti-car in London and I know the pollution is constantly terrible where it is most sensible to either cycle or use public transport, so f*ck 'em. The car drivers don't give a sh!t about my health so I'm not inclined to care about their finances.
Btw the ULEZ boundary closest to me has farmers fields etc. Not even remotely urban.0 -
See the issue here is that Khan is accused of not providing enough evidence to support his claims. So there may not be the source data for him to do that - and the onus is on him/TFL to show the evidence, not me.rjsterry said:
I can only ever see the first few lines of Telegraph articles on my phone. If you can point me to the original source I'll have a look. In any case, didn't we rehearse that argument at length before? I'm not sure anything has changed since then. There's not going to be any substantive new data as the extension has only been in place for a matter of weeks.Stevo_666 said:
OK, but my point point was that Khan and TFL were misleading people about the benefits of ULEZ - did you read the article I linked?. What are your thoughts on thatrjsterry said:
Stevo, he was only slightly ahead before the ULEZ was extended. He's now polling 50%: double the Conservative candidate. If that's not doing him some good I don't know what is. I'd rather someone else had a go as well (for different reasons), but it's pretty unlikely to happen.Stevo_666 said:
Not a magic bullet, but it hasn't done him any good as far as I can see. Even if he does survive, it will at least serve as a warning to other local leftie politicians about this sort of thing.rjsterry said:
I think reading that sort of guff is what has led you to thinking that ULEZ opposition was some sort of magic bullet. I posted the YouGov polling above which was completed shortly after the expansion went live. Khan has a bigger lead over the Conservative candidate than Starmer does over Sunak.Stevo_666 said:
Not looked tbh. Buy unless the election is in the next few days you can quote current polls all you like.rjsterry said:
Are you just pretending you haven't seen the polling?Stevo_666 said:
Not sure that it has gone. Let's see come mayoral election time.rjsterry said:
And then all of a sudden it vanished. Amazing. Where have they all gone??🤔Stevo_666 said:
There certainly seemed to be. Which Khan ignored because he thought that he was right and everyone else was wrong.monkimark said:
Is there a serious opposition this time? I haven't followed it at all apart from seeing the Tory candidate getting a bit of grief for some dodgy tweetsStevo_666 said:Maybe they're dressing as Khan, given his political career is in danger of extinction as a result of the ULEZ expansion?
Here is quite a timely article: you and others who swallowed the TFL line on ULEZ rather too easily should read this:
https://telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/18/sadiq-khan-ulez-expansion-pollution-reduction-asa-report/
Good deflection attempt though."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
How does that fit in with TFLs aims for the ULEZ?TheBigBean said:
As a compromise, I'm happy if the ULEZ charge applies to all vehicles.Stevo_666 said:
Doesn't change the fact that Khan stands accused of misleading the public. Wonder why quite a few people seem to be dodging the issue?rick_chasey said:
No idea, haven't been following it, I don't use a car in London and even if I did my car complies comfortably.Stevo_666 said:
So no comment from you on Khan and TFL misleading the public on ULEZ benefits?rick_chasey said:Just give stevo the "too early to tell" argument ;-) he's familiar with it.
I am generally anti-car in London and I know the pollution is constantly terrible where it is most sensible to either cycle or use public transport, so f*ck 'em. The car drivers don't give a sh!t about my health so I'm not inclined to care about their finances.
Btw the ULEZ boundary closest to me has farmers fields etc. Not even remotely urban."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
With the camera tech they have I wonder if they could create an algorithm that plots the car's journey within the ULEZ limits and charges them 2x whatever it would cost to do the nearest equivalent journey on public transport.
For commercial vehicles you could create a different set of pricing.
Dreamy.0 -
He's asking for the article source.Stevo_666 said:
See the issue here is that Khan is accused of not providing enough evidence to support his claims. So there may not be the source data for him to do that - and the onus is on him/TFL to show the evidence, not me.rjsterry said:
I can only ever see the first few lines of Telegraph articles on my phone. If you can point me to the original source I'll have a look. In any case, didn't we rehearse that argument at length before? I'm not sure anything has changed since then. There's not going to be any substantive new data as the extension has only been in place for a matter of weeks.Stevo_666 said:
OK, but my point point was that Khan and TFL were misleading people about the benefits of ULEZ - did you read the article I linked?. What are your thoughts on thatrjsterry said:
Stevo, he was only slightly ahead before the ULEZ was extended. He's now polling 50%: double the Conservative candidate. If that's not doing him some good I don't know what is. I'd rather someone else had a go as well (for different reasons), but it's pretty unlikely to happen.Stevo_666 said:
Not a magic bullet, but it hasn't done him any good as far as I can see. Even if he does survive, it will at least serve as a warning to other local leftie politicians about this sort of thing.rjsterry said:
I think reading that sort of guff is what has led you to thinking that ULEZ opposition was some sort of magic bullet. I posted the YouGov polling above which was completed shortly after the expansion went live. Khan has a bigger lead over the Conservative candidate than Starmer does over Sunak.Stevo_666 said:
Not looked tbh. Buy unless the election is in the next few days you can quote current polls all you like.rjsterry said:
Are you just pretending you haven't seen the polling?Stevo_666 said:
Not sure that it has gone. Let's see come mayoral election time.rjsterry said:
And then all of a sudden it vanished. Amazing. Where have they all gone??🤔Stevo_666 said:
There certainly seemed to be. Which Khan ignored because he thought that he was right and everyone else was wrong.monkimark said:
Is there a serious opposition this time? I haven't followed it at all apart from seeing the Tory candidate getting a bit of grief for some dodgy tweetsStevo_666 said:Maybe they're dressing as Khan, given his political career is in danger of extinction as a result of the ULEZ expansion?
Here is quite a timely article: you and others who swallowed the TFL line on ULEZ rather too easily should read this:
https://telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/18/sadiq-khan-ulez-expansion-pollution-reduction-asa-report/
Good deflection attempt though.
There isn't one linked rjsterry.The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) is set to criticise Transport for London (TfL) for “misleading” claims about the expansion of the Ulez zone reducing levels of poisonous nitrogen dioxide (NO2) particles.
The ASA draft recommendations will come as a huge embarrassment for both TfL and Mr Khan, the organisation’s chairman, after £9 million was spent on a “marketing blitz” ahead of the controversial Ulez expansion.
The report, marked “classified”, was handed to The Telegraph after it was sent to interested parties before any potential amendments, ratification and publication.- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
*shrugs* She's my mother in law, what can you do.TheBigBean said:
That's the sort of snobbery I would really struggle to tolerate. Have you asked up which party hitchhikers vote for?rick_chasey said:
My MIL, mrs Brexit daily Mail, who cannot drive or cycle following a stroke, refuses on principal to take the bus as it’s for “labour voters”.pangolin said:6 minutes 20:
"Perfect travel conditions in central London, you've got tubes you've got trains you've got........ we simply don't have that out here, so people are absolutely compelled to use their cars"
*Camera cuts to bus going past*
Honestly, she would rather be entirely reliant on lifts from people.
In that part of the world, for that generation, who you vote for is really an admission of class; are you working class or not.
She's made it out of a really sh!tty part of that part of the world, so voting labour to her would be admitting she is back in a sh!thole, regardless of the reality.
It's nothing to do with policies, as she's genuinely voting against her own interests and she has had this pointed out to her.0 -
It's not her voting I'm taking issue with. It's the being too classy to take public transport.rick_chasey said:
*shrugs* She's my mother in law, what can you do.TheBigBean said:
That's the sort of snobbery I would really struggle to tolerate. Have you asked up which party hitchhikers vote for?rick_chasey said:
My MIL, mrs Brexit daily Mail, who cannot drive or cycle following a stroke, refuses on principal to take the bus as it’s for “labour voters”.pangolin said:6 minutes 20:
"Perfect travel conditions in central London, you've got tubes you've got trains you've got........ we simply don't have that out here, so people are absolutely compelled to use their cars"
*Camera cuts to bus going past*
Honestly, she would rather be entirely reliant on lifts from people.
In that part of the world, for that generation, who you vote for is really an admission of class; are you working class or not.
She's made it out of a really sh!tty part of that part of the world, so voting labour to her would be admitting she is back in a sh!thole, regardless of the reality.
It's nothing to do with policies, as she's genuinely voting against her own interests and she has had this pointed out to her.0 -
She pities people who use it, so presumably she doesn't want to be self pitying.TheBigBean said:
It's not her voting I'm taking issue with. It's the being too classy to take public transport.rick_chasey said:
*shrugs* She's my mother in law, what can you do.TheBigBean said:
That's the sort of snobbery I would really struggle to tolerate. Have you asked up which party hitchhikers vote for?rick_chasey said:
My MIL, mrs Brexit daily Mail, who cannot drive or cycle following a stroke, refuses on principal to take the bus as it’s for “labour voters”.pangolin said:6 minutes 20:
"Perfect travel conditions in central London, you've got tubes you've got trains you've got........ we simply don't have that out here, so people are absolutely compelled to use their cars"
*Camera cuts to bus going past*
Honestly, she would rather be entirely reliant on lifts from people.
In that part of the world, for that generation, who you vote for is really an admission of class; are you working class or not.
She's made it out of a really sh!tty part of that part of the world, so voting labour to her would be admitting she is back in a sh!thole, regardless of the reality.
It's nothing to do with policies, as she's genuinely voting against her own interests and she has had this pointed out to her.0 -
Instead she has lost her independence and leaches off everyone else. I pity her.rick_chasey said:
She pities people who use it, so presumably she doesn't want to be self pitying.TheBigBean said:
It's not her voting I'm taking issue with. It's the being too classy to take public transport.rick_chasey said:
*shrugs* She's my mother in law, what can you do.TheBigBean said:
That's the sort of snobbery I would really struggle to tolerate. Have you asked up which party hitchhikers vote for?rick_chasey said:
My MIL, mrs Brexit daily Mail, who cannot drive or cycle following a stroke, refuses on principal to take the bus as it’s for “labour voters”.pangolin said:6 minutes 20:
"Perfect travel conditions in central London, you've got tubes you've got trains you've got........ we simply don't have that out here, so people are absolutely compelled to use their cars"
*Camera cuts to bus going past*
Honestly, she would rather be entirely reliant on lifts from people.
In that part of the world, for that generation, who you vote for is really an admission of class; are you working class or not.
She's made it out of a really sh!tty part of that part of the world, so voting labour to her would be admitting she is back in a sh!thole, regardless of the reality.
It's nothing to do with policies, as she's genuinely voting against her own interests and she has had this pointed out to her.0 -
I pity the "everyone else".TheBigBean said:
Instead she has lost her independence and leaches off everyone else. I pity her.rick_chasey said:
She pities people who use it, so presumably she doesn't want to be self pitying.TheBigBean said:
It's not her voting I'm taking issue with. It's the being too classy to take public transport.rick_chasey said:
*shrugs* She's my mother in law, what can you do.TheBigBean said:
That's the sort of snobbery I would really struggle to tolerate. Have you asked up which party hitchhikers vote for?rick_chasey said:
My MIL, mrs Brexit daily Mail, who cannot drive or cycle following a stroke, refuses on principal to take the bus as it’s for “labour voters”.pangolin said:6 minutes 20:
"Perfect travel conditions in central London, you've got tubes you've got trains you've got........ we simply don't have that out here, so people are absolutely compelled to use their cars"
*Camera cuts to bus going past*
Honestly, she would rather be entirely reliant on lifts from people.
In that part of the world, for that generation, who you vote for is really an admission of class; are you working class or not.
She's made it out of a really sh!tty part of that part of the world, so voting labour to her would be admitting she is back in a sh!thole, regardless of the reality.
It's nothing to do with policies, as she's genuinely voting against her own interests and she has had this pointed out to her.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Rumours of a planned charge per mile being the next stage.rick_chasey said:With the camera tech they have I wonder if they could create an algorithm that plots the car's journey within the ULEZ limits and charges them 2x whatever it would cost to do the nearest equivalent journey on public transport.
For commercial vehicles you could create a different set of pricing.
Dreamy.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Could you outline exactly what is supposed to have been misrepresented? Ideally from a slightly more neutral source.Stevo_666 said:
Doesn't change the fact that Khan stands accused of misleading the public. Wonder why quite a few people seem to be dodging the issue?rick_chasey said:
No idea, haven't been following it, I don't use a car in London and even if I did my car complies comfortably.Stevo_666 said:
So no comment from you on Khan and TFL misleading the public on ULEZ benefits?rick_chasey said:Just give stevo the "too early to tell" argument ;-) he's familiar with it.
I am generally anti-car in London and I know the pollution is constantly terrible where it is most sensible to either cycle or use public transport, so f*ck 'em. The car drivers don't give a sh!t about my health so I'm not inclined to care about their finances.
Btw the ULEZ boundary closest to me has farmers fields etc. Not even remotely urban.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Ah, so it is just a rehash of the same argument we were having before. Not sure there's much to be gained by repeating it.pangolin said:
He's asking for the article source.Stevo_666 said:
See the issue here is that Khan is accused of not providing enough evidence to support his claims. So there may not be the source data for him to do that - and the onus is on him/TFL to show the evidence, not me.rjsterry said:
I can only ever see the first few lines of Telegraph articles on my phone. If you can point me to the original source I'll have a look. In any case, didn't we rehearse that argument at length before? I'm not sure anything has changed since then. There's not going to be any substantive new data as the extension has only been in place for a matter of weeks.Stevo_666 said:
OK, but my point point was that Khan and TFL were misleading people about the benefits of ULEZ - did you read the article I linked?. What are your thoughts on thatrjsterry said:
Stevo, he was only slightly ahead before the ULEZ was extended. He's now polling 50%: double the Conservative candidate. If that's not doing him some good I don't know what is. I'd rather someone else had a go as well (for different reasons), but it's pretty unlikely to happen.Stevo_666 said:
Not a magic bullet, but it hasn't done him any good as far as I can see. Even if he does survive, it will at least serve as a warning to other local leftie politicians about this sort of thing.rjsterry said:
I think reading that sort of guff is what has led you to thinking that ULEZ opposition was some sort of magic bullet. I posted the YouGov polling above which was completed shortly after the expansion went live. Khan has a bigger lead over the Conservative candidate than Starmer does over Sunak.Stevo_666 said:
Not looked tbh. Buy unless the election is in the next few days you can quote current polls all you like.rjsterry said:
Are you just pretending you haven't seen the polling?Stevo_666 said:
Not sure that it has gone. Let's see come mayoral election time.rjsterry said:
And then all of a sudden it vanished. Amazing. Where have they all gone??🤔Stevo_666 said:
There certainly seemed to be. Which Khan ignored because he thought that he was right and everyone else was wrong.monkimark said:
Is there a serious opposition this time? I haven't followed it at all apart from seeing the Tory candidate getting a bit of grief for some dodgy tweetsStevo_666 said:Maybe they're dressing as Khan, given his political career is in danger of extinction as a result of the ULEZ expansion?
Here is quite a timely article: you and others who swallowed the TFL line on ULEZ rather too easily should read this:
https://telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/18/sadiq-khan-ulez-expansion-pollution-reduction-asa-report/
Good deflection attempt though.
There isn't one linked rjsterry.The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) is set to criticise Transport for London (TfL) for “misleading” claims about the expansion of the Ulez zone reducing levels of poisonous nitrogen dioxide (NO2) particles.
The ASA draft recommendations will come as a huge embarrassment for both TfL and Mr Khan, the organisation’s chairman, after £9 million was spent on a “marketing blitz” ahead of the controversial Ulez expansion.
The report, marked “classified”, was handed to The Telegraph after it was sent to interested parties before any potential amendments, ratification and publication.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Mr T used to "pity the fool" and he drove a van. So where does that leave us?0
-
Think we're fine without her pity.rick_chasey said:
She pities people who use it, so presumably she doesn't want to be self pitying.TheBigBean said:
It's not her voting I'm taking issue with. It's the being too classy to take public transport.rick_chasey said:
*shrugs* She's my mother in law, what can you do.TheBigBean said:
That's the sort of snobbery I would really struggle to tolerate. Have you asked up which party hitchhikers vote for?rick_chasey said:
My MIL, mrs Brexit daily Mail, who cannot drive or cycle following a stroke, refuses on principal to take the bus as it’s for “labour voters”.pangolin said:6 minutes 20:
"Perfect travel conditions in central London, you've got tubes you've got trains you've got........ we simply don't have that out here, so people are absolutely compelled to use their cars"
*Camera cuts to bus going past*
Honestly, she would rather be entirely reliant on lifts from people.
In that part of the world, for that generation, who you vote for is really an admission of class; are you working class or not.
She's made it out of a really sh!tty part of that part of the world, so voting labour to her would be admitting she is back in a sh!thole, regardless of the reality.
It's nothing to do with policies, as she's genuinely voting against her own interests and she has had this pointed out to her.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Not so nice for her daughter.rjsterry said:
Think we're fine without her pity.rick_chasey said:
She pities people who use it, so presumably she doesn't want to be self pitying.TheBigBean said:
It's not her voting I'm taking issue with. It's the being too classy to take public transport.rick_chasey said:
*shrugs* She's my mother in law, what can you do.TheBigBean said:
That's the sort of snobbery I would really struggle to tolerate. Have you asked up which party hitchhikers vote for?rick_chasey said:
My MIL, mrs Brexit daily Mail, who cannot drive or cycle following a stroke, refuses on principal to take the bus as it’s for “labour voters”.pangolin said:6 minutes 20:
"Perfect travel conditions in central London, you've got tubes you've got trains you've got........ we simply don't have that out here, so people are absolutely compelled to use their cars"
*Camera cuts to bus going past*
Honestly, she would rather be entirely reliant on lifts from people.
In that part of the world, for that generation, who you vote for is really an admission of class; are you working class or not.
She's made it out of a really sh!tty part of that part of the world, so voting labour to her would be admitting she is back in a sh!thole, regardless of the reality.
It's nothing to do with policies, as she's genuinely voting against her own interests and she has had this pointed out to her.0 -
Well I think the argument previously involved me being told that I didn't know what I was talking about, when it came to the science, so we could skip straight to the part where you say the ASA also don't know what they are talking about if you would like?rjsterry said:
Ah, so it is just a rehash of the same argument we were having before. Not sure there's much to be gained by repeating it.pangolin said:
He's asking for the article source.Stevo_666 said:
See the issue here is that Khan is accused of not providing enough evidence to support his claims. So there may not be the source data for him to do that - and the onus is on him/TFL to show the evidence, not me.rjsterry said:
I can only ever see the first few lines of Telegraph articles on my phone. If you can point me to the original source I'll have a look. In any case, didn't we rehearse that argument at length before? I'm not sure anything has changed since then. There's not going to be any substantive new data as the extension has only been in place for a matter of weeks.Stevo_666 said:
OK, but my point point was that Khan and TFL were misleading people about the benefits of ULEZ - did you read the article I linked?. What are your thoughts on thatrjsterry said:
Stevo, he was only slightly ahead before the ULEZ was extended. He's now polling 50%: double the Conservative candidate. If that's not doing him some good I don't know what is. I'd rather someone else had a go as well (for different reasons), but it's pretty unlikely to happen.Stevo_666 said:
Not a magic bullet, but it hasn't done him any good as far as I can see. Even if he does survive, it will at least serve as a warning to other local leftie politicians about this sort of thing.rjsterry said:
I think reading that sort of guff is what has led you to thinking that ULEZ opposition was some sort of magic bullet. I posted the YouGov polling above which was completed shortly after the expansion went live. Khan has a bigger lead over the Conservative candidate than Starmer does over Sunak.Stevo_666 said:
Not looked tbh. Buy unless the election is in the next few days you can quote current polls all you like.rjsterry said:
Are you just pretending you haven't seen the polling?Stevo_666 said:
Not sure that it has gone. Let's see come mayoral election time.rjsterry said:
And then all of a sudden it vanished. Amazing. Where have they all gone??🤔Stevo_666 said:
There certainly seemed to be. Which Khan ignored because he thought that he was right and everyone else was wrong.monkimark said:
Is there a serious opposition this time? I haven't followed it at all apart from seeing the Tory candidate getting a bit of grief for some dodgy tweetsStevo_666 said:Maybe they're dressing as Khan, given his political career is in danger of extinction as a result of the ULEZ expansion?
Here is quite a timely article: you and others who swallowed the TFL line on ULEZ rather too easily should read this:
https://telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/18/sadiq-khan-ulez-expansion-pollution-reduction-asa-report/
Good deflection attempt though.
There isn't one linked rjsterry.The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) is set to criticise Transport for London (TfL) for “misleading” claims about the expansion of the Ulez zone reducing levels of poisonous nitrogen dioxide (NO2) particles.
The ASA draft recommendations will come as a huge embarrassment for both TfL and Mr Khan, the organisation’s chairman, after £9 million was spent on a “marketing blitz” ahead of the controversial Ulez expansion.
The report, marked “classified”, was handed to The Telegraph after it was sent to interested parties before any potential amendments, ratification and publication.0 -
I think we can assume that if the ASA I'd pursuing the case then there is enough evidence for them.pangolin said:
He's asking for the article source.Stevo_666 said:
See the issue here is that Khan is accused of not providing enough evidence to support his claims. So there may not be the source data for him to do that - and the onus is on him/TFL to show the evidence, not me.rjsterry said:
I can only ever see the first few lines of Telegraph articles on my phone. If you can point me to the original source I'll have a look. In any case, didn't we rehearse that argument at length before? I'm not sure anything has changed since then. There's not going to be any substantive new data as the extension has only been in place for a matter of weeks.Stevo_666 said:
OK, but my point point was that Khan and TFL were misleading people about the benefits of ULEZ - did you read the article I linked?. What are your thoughts on thatrjsterry said:
Stevo, he was only slightly ahead before the ULEZ was extended. He's now polling 50%: double the Conservative candidate. If that's not doing him some good I don't know what is. I'd rather someone else had a go as well (for different reasons), but it's pretty unlikely to happen.Stevo_666 said:
Not a magic bullet, but it hasn't done him any good as far as I can see. Even if he does survive, it will at least serve as a warning to other local leftie politicians about this sort of thing.rjsterry said:
I think reading that sort of guff is what has led you to thinking that ULEZ opposition was some sort of magic bullet. I posted the YouGov polling above which was completed shortly after the expansion went live. Khan has a bigger lead over the Conservative candidate than Starmer does over Sunak.Stevo_666 said:
Not looked tbh. Buy unless the election is in the next few days you can quote current polls all you like.rjsterry said:
Are you just pretending you haven't seen the polling?Stevo_666 said:
Not sure that it has gone. Let's see come mayoral election time.rjsterry said:
And then all of a sudden it vanished. Amazing. Where have they all gone??🤔Stevo_666 said:
There certainly seemed to be. Which Khan ignored because he thought that he was right and everyone else was wrong.monkimark said:
Is there a serious opposition this time? I haven't followed it at all apart from seeing the Tory candidate getting a bit of grief for some dodgy tweetsStevo_666 said:Maybe they're dressing as Khan, given his political career is in danger of extinction as a result of the ULEZ expansion?
Here is quite a timely article: you and others who swallowed the TFL line on ULEZ rather too easily should read this:
https://telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/18/sadiq-khan-ulez-expansion-pollution-reduction-asa-report/
Good deflection attempt though.
There isn't one linked rjsterry.The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) is set to criticise Transport for London (TfL) for “misleading” claims about the expansion of the Ulez zone reducing levels of poisonous nitrogen dioxide (NO2) particles.
The ASA draft recommendations will come as a huge embarrassment for both TfL and Mr Khan, the organisation’s chairman, after £9 million was spent on a “marketing blitz” ahead of the controversial Ulez expansion.
The report, marked “classified”, was handed to The Telegraph after it was sent to interested parties before any potential amendments, ratification and publication."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
That's all it is, a dream. Non starter outside the car haters echo chamber.rick_chasey said:With the camera tech they have I wonder if they could create an algorithm that plots the car's journey within the ULEZ limits and charges them 2x whatever it would cost to do the nearest equivalent journey on public transport.
For commercial vehicles you could create a different set of pricing.
Dreamy."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Is this the one Stevo?
https://www.independent.co.uk/business/tfl-misled-public-about-ulez-benefits-according-to-leaked-draft-report-b2450314.html
As far as I can tell, it is the adverts that are being criticized (not the ULEZ scheme itself) because they didn't make it clear that predicted reductions in pollution were models rather than measured reductions - although presumably the adverts were before ULEZ was operational so I can't see how anyone could have thought otherwise?Following the ASA’s investigation, it found two adverts were “misleading” because they “did not clarify” claims NO2 levels had “reduced by nearly half” as a result of Ulez, and were based on “estimates or modelled scenarios” and not “actual figures”.Stevo_666 said:
I think we can assume that if the ASA I'd pursuing the case then there is enough evidence for them.pangolin said:
He's asking for the article source.Stevo_666 said:
See the issue here is that Khan is accused of not providing enough evidence to support his claims. So there may not be the source data for him to do that - and the onus is on him/TFL to show the evidence, not me.rjsterry said:
I can only ever see the first few lines of Telegraph articles on my phone. If you can point me to the original source I'll have a look. In any case, didn't we rehearse that argument at length before? I'm not sure anything has changed since then. There's not going to be any substantive new data as the extension has only been in place for a matter of weeks.Stevo_666 said:
OK, but my point point was that Khan and TFL were misleading people about the benefits of ULEZ - did you read the article I linked?. What are your thoughts on thatrjsterry said:
Stevo, he was only slightly ahead before the ULEZ was extended. He's now polling 50%: double the Conservative candidate. If that's not doing him some good I don't know what is. I'd rather someone else had a go as well (for different reasons), but it's pretty unlikely to happen.Stevo_666 said:
Not a magic bullet, but it hasn't done him any good as far as I can see. Even if he does survive, it will at least serve as a warning to other local leftie politicians about this sort of thing.rjsterry said:
I think reading that sort of guff is what has led you to thinking that ULEZ opposition was some sort of magic bullet. I posted the YouGov polling above which was completed shortly after the expansion went live. Khan has a bigger lead over the Conservative candidate than Starmer does over Sunak.Stevo_666 said:
Not looked tbh. Buy unless the election is in the next few days you can quote current polls all you like.rjsterry said:
Are you just pretending you haven't seen the polling?Stevo_666 said:
Not sure that it has gone. Let's see come mayoral election time.rjsterry said:
And then all of a sudden it vanished. Amazing. Where have they all gone??🤔Stevo_666 said:
There certainly seemed to be. Which Khan ignored because he thought that he was right and everyone else was wrong.monkimark said:
Is there a serious opposition this time? I haven't followed it at all apart from seeing the Tory candidate getting a bit of grief for some dodgy tweetsStevo_666 said:Maybe they're dressing as Khan, given his political career is in danger of extinction as a result of the ULEZ expansion?
Here is quite a timely article: you and others who swallowed the TFL line on ULEZ rather too easily should read this:
https://telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/18/sadiq-khan-ulez-expansion-pollution-reduction-asa-report/
Good deflection attempt though.
There isn't one linked rjsterry.The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) is set to criticise Transport for London (TfL) for “misleading” claims about the expansion of the Ulez zone reducing levels of poisonous nitrogen dioxide (NO2) particles.
The ASA draft recommendations will come as a huge embarrassment for both TfL and Mr Khan, the organisation’s chairman, after £9 million was spent on a “marketing blitz” ahead of the controversial Ulez expansion.
The report, marked “classified”, was handed to The Telegraph after it was sent to interested parties before any potential amendments, ratification and publication.0 -
😁 I think there was plenty of that on both sides. The point here seems to be that predicted reductions were necessarily based on modelling not actual results. That may not have been made clear on adverts. I don't know: I didn't actually see any of these adverts despite living in the ULEZ expansion area. It's now happened, so give it a few months and you can either say told you so or admit that it has worked. Or more realistically agree that pollution has reduced but dispute exactly why.First.Aspect said:
Well I think the argument previously involved me being told that I didn't know what I was talking about, when it came to the science, so we could skip straight to the part where you say the ASA also don't know what they are talking about if you would like?rjsterry said:
Ah, so it is just a rehash of the same argument we were having before. Not sure there's much to be gained by repeating it.pangolin said:
He's asking for the article source.Stevo_666 said:
See the issue here is that Khan is accused of not providing enough evidence to support his claims. So there may not be the source data for him to do that - and the onus is on him/TFL to show the evidence, not me.rjsterry said:
I can only ever see the first few lines of Telegraph articles on my phone. If you can point me to the original source I'll have a look. In any case, didn't we rehearse that argument at length before? I'm not sure anything has changed since then. There's not going to be any substantive new data as the extension has only been in place for a matter of weeks.Stevo_666 said:
OK, but my point point was that Khan and TFL were misleading people about the benefits of ULEZ - did you read the article I linked?. What are your thoughts on thatrjsterry said:
Stevo, he was only slightly ahead before the ULEZ was extended. He's now polling 50%: double the Conservative candidate. If that's not doing him some good I don't know what is. I'd rather someone else had a go as well (for different reasons), but it's pretty unlikely to happen.Stevo_666 said:
Not a magic bullet, but it hasn't done him any good as far as I can see. Even if he does survive, it will at least serve as a warning to other local leftie politicians about this sort of thing.rjsterry said:
I think reading that sort of guff is what has led you to thinking that ULEZ opposition was some sort of magic bullet. I posted the YouGov polling above which was completed shortly after the expansion went live. Khan has a bigger lead over the Conservative candidate than Starmer does over Sunak.Stevo_666 said:
Not looked tbh. Buy unless the election is in the next few days you can quote current polls all you like.rjsterry said:
Are you just pretending you haven't seen the polling?Stevo_666 said:
Not sure that it has gone. Let's see come mayoral election time.rjsterry said:
And then all of a sudden it vanished. Amazing. Where have they all gone??🤔Stevo_666 said:
There certainly seemed to be. Which Khan ignored because he thought that he was right and everyone else was wrong.monkimark said:
Is there a serious opposition this time? I haven't followed it at all apart from seeing the Tory candidate getting a bit of grief for some dodgy tweetsStevo_666 said:Maybe they're dressing as Khan, given his political career is in danger of extinction as a result of the ULEZ expansion?
Here is quite a timely article: you and others who swallowed the TFL line on ULEZ rather too easily should read this:
https://telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/18/sadiq-khan-ulez-expansion-pollution-reduction-asa-report/
Good deflection attempt though.
There isn't one linked rjsterry.The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) is set to criticise Transport for London (TfL) for “misleading” claims about the expansion of the Ulez zone reducing levels of poisonous nitrogen dioxide (NO2) particles.
The ASA draft recommendations will come as a huge embarrassment for both TfL and Mr Khan, the organisation’s chairman, after £9 million was spent on a “marketing blitz” ahead of the controversial Ulez expansion.
The report, marked “classified”, was handed to The Telegraph after it was sent to interested parties before any potential amendments, ratification and publication.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
It's pretty rational tbh. London is too dense for car driving.Stevo_666 said:
That's all it is, a dream. Non starter outside the car haters echo chamber.rick_chasey said:With the camera tech they have I wonder if they could create an algorithm that plots the car's journey within the ULEZ limits and charges them 2x whatever it would cost to do the nearest equivalent journey on public transport.
For commercial vehicles you could create a different set of pricing.
Dreamy.0 -
Wouldn't they need cameras on pretty much every street in London though?
Also, the bus fare cap is £5.25 so driving around london all day would be capped at £10.50.0 -
Depends if your route would be fasted serviced just by the bus, rightmonkimark said:Wouldn't they need cameras on pretty much every street in London though?
Also, the bus fare cap is £5.25 so driving around london all day would be capped at £10.50.
They could get the algo to pick the fastest, rather than the cheapest public transport.
travel from zone 6 to 1 is capped at £14.90 at peak.0 -
I'm going to go out on a limb and predict very little change.rjsterry said:
😁 I think there was plenty of that on both sides. The point here seems to be that predicted reductions were necessarily based on modelling not actual results. That may not have been made clear on adverts. I don't know: I didn't actually see any of these adverts despite living in the ULEZ expansion area. It's now happened, so give it a few months and you can either say told you so or admit that it has worked. Or more realistically agree that pollution has reduced but dispute exactly why.First.Aspect said:
Well I think the argument previously involved me being told that I didn't know what I was talking about, when it came to the science, so we could skip straight to the part where you say the ASA also don't know what they are talking about if you would like?rjsterry said:
Ah, so it is just a rehash of the same argument we were having before. Not sure there's much to be gained by repeating it.pangolin said:
He's asking for the article source.Stevo_666 said:
See the issue here is that Khan is accused of not providing enough evidence to support his claims. So there may not be the source data for him to do that - and the onus is on him/TFL to show the evidence, not me.rjsterry said:
I can only ever see the first few lines of Telegraph articles on my phone. If you can point me to the original source I'll have a look. In any case, didn't we rehearse that argument at length before? I'm not sure anything has changed since then. There's not going to be any substantive new data as the extension has only been in place for a matter of weeks.Stevo_666 said:
OK, but my point point was that Khan and TFL were misleading people about the benefits of ULEZ - did you read the article I linked?. What are your thoughts on thatrjsterry said:
Stevo, he was only slightly ahead before the ULEZ was extended. He's now polling 50%: double the Conservative candidate. If that's not doing him some good I don't know what is. I'd rather someone else had a go as well (for different reasons), but it's pretty unlikely to happen.Stevo_666 said:
Not a magic bullet, but it hasn't done him any good as far as I can see. Even if he does survive, it will at least serve as a warning to other local leftie politicians about this sort of thing.rjsterry said:
I think reading that sort of guff is what has led you to thinking that ULEZ opposition was some sort of magic bullet. I posted the YouGov polling above which was completed shortly after the expansion went live. Khan has a bigger lead over the Conservative candidate than Starmer does over Sunak.Stevo_666 said:
Not looked tbh. Buy unless the election is in the next few days you can quote current polls all you like.rjsterry said:
Are you just pretending you haven't seen the polling?Stevo_666 said:
Not sure that it has gone. Let's see come mayoral election time.rjsterry said:
And then all of a sudden it vanished. Amazing. Where have they all gone??🤔Stevo_666 said:
There certainly seemed to be. Which Khan ignored because he thought that he was right and everyone else was wrong.monkimark said:
Is there a serious opposition this time? I haven't followed it at all apart from seeing the Tory candidate getting a bit of grief for some dodgy tweetsStevo_666 said:Maybe they're dressing as Khan, given his political career is in danger of extinction as a result of the ULEZ expansion?
Here is quite a timely article: you and others who swallowed the TFL line on ULEZ rather too easily should read this:
https://telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/18/sadiq-khan-ulez-expansion-pollution-reduction-asa-report/
Good deflection attempt though.
There isn't one linked rjsterry.The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) is set to criticise Transport for London (TfL) for “misleading” claims about the expansion of the Ulez zone reducing levels of poisonous nitrogen dioxide (NO2) particles.
The ASA draft recommendations will come as a huge embarrassment for both TfL and Mr Khan, the organisation’s chairman, after £9 million was spent on a “marketing blitz” ahead of the controversial Ulez expansion.
The report, marked “classified”, was handed to The Telegraph after it was sent to interested parties before any potential amendments, ratification and publication.
Am coming round to BBs view that is really just needs to be a blanket charge for driving, if anything.0 -
First.Aspect said:
I'm going to go out on a limb and predict very little change.rjsterry said:
😁 I think there was plenty of that on both sides. The point here seems to be that predicted reductions were necessarily based on modelling not actual results. That may not have been made clear on adverts. I don't know: I didn't actually see any of these adverts despite living in the ULEZ expansion area. It's now happened, so give it a few months and you can either say told you so or admit that it has worked. Or more realistically agree that pollution has reduced but dispute exactly why.First.Aspect said:
Well I think the argument previously involved me being told that I didn't know what I was talking about, when it came to the science, so we could skip straight to the part where you say the ASA also don't know what they are talking about if you would like?rjsterry said:
Ah, so it is just a rehash of the same argument we were having before. Not sure there's much to be gained by repeating it.pangolin said:
He's asking for the article source.Stevo_666 said:
See the issue here is that Khan is accused of not providing enough evidence to support his claims. So there may not be the source data for him to do that - and the onus is on him/TFL to show the evidence, not me.rjsterry said:
I can only ever see the first few lines of Telegraph articles on my phone. If you can point me to the original source I'll have a look. In any case, didn't we rehearse that argument at length before? I'm not sure anything has changed since then. There's not going to be any substantive new data as the extension has only been in place for a matter of weeks.Stevo_666 said:
OK, but my point point was that Khan and TFL were misleading people about the benefits of ULEZ - did you read the article I linked?. What are your thoughts on thatrjsterry said:
Stevo, he was only slightly ahead before the ULEZ was extended. He's now polling 50%: double the Conservative candidate. If that's not doing him some good I don't know what is. I'd rather someone else had a go as well (for different reasons), but it's pretty unlikely to happen.Stevo_666 said:
Not a magic bullet, but it hasn't done him any good as far as I can see. Even if he does survive, it will at least serve as a warning to other local leftie politicians about this sort of thing.rjsterry said:
I think reading that sort of guff is what has led you to thinking that ULEZ opposition was some sort of magic bullet. I posted the YouGov polling above which was completed shortly after the expansion went live. Khan has a bigger lead over the Conservative candidate than Starmer does over Sunak.Stevo_666 said:
Not looked tbh. Buy unless the election is in the next few days you can quote current polls all you like.rjsterry said:
Are you just pretending you haven't seen the polling?Stevo_666 said:
Not sure that it has gone. Let's see come mayoral election time.rjsterry said:
And then all of a sudden it vanished. Amazing. Where have they all gone??🤔Stevo_666 said:
There certainly seemed to be. Which Khan ignored because he thought that he was right and everyone else was wrong.monkimark said:
Is there a serious opposition this time? I haven't followed it at all apart from seeing the Tory candidate getting a bit of grief for some dodgy tweetsStevo_666 said:Maybe they're dressing as Khan, given his political career is in danger of extinction as a result of the ULEZ expansion?
Here is quite a timely article: you and others who swallowed the TFL line on ULEZ rather too easily should read this:
https://telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/18/sadiq-khan-ulez-expansion-pollution-reduction-asa-report/
Good deflection attempt though.
There isn't one linked rjsterry.The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) is set to criticise Transport for London (TfL) for “misleading” claims about the expansion of the Ulez zone reducing levels of poisonous nitrogen dioxide (NO2) particles.
The ASA draft recommendations will come as a huge embarrassment for both TfL and Mr Khan, the organisation’s chairman, after £9 million was spent on a “marketing blitz” ahead of the controversial Ulez expansion.
The report, marked “classified”, was handed to The Telegraph after it was sent to interested parties before any potential amendments, ratification and publication.
Am coming round to BBs view that is really just needs to be a blanket charge for driving, if anything.
#waronpeoplewhocantconceiveofchanginghabitstobenifitotherpeopleandtheplanet.0
