Do you want to discuss boring politics? (12 Viewers)

D

Deleted member 9744

Guest
Surely the ULEZ is a bit of a red herring anyway. Does a constituency MP have the power to stop it’s implementation?
Most people don't vote based on reason. We wouldn't have otherwise. Remember all those Turks and Syrians that were coming here unless we voted to leave. Oh and Turkey/Turkiye is still not in the EU. Also don't forget we have had 14 years of Tory Government because Ed Milliband ate a bacon sandwich.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Surely the ULEZ is a bit of a red herring anyway. Does a constituency MP have the power to stop it’s implementation?

No
The original congestion zone definitely was a good introduction where there is a full
Service of buses , trains and underground - road pollution was rife

however LTNs and the extension of ULEZ would very much hit service businesses and generally people on lower incomes who can’t afford to replace their older diesel cars

and as above it has been rushed through

khan is a crook !

People on the lowest incomes in London are more likely to be pedestrians than car owners. If your concern is social justice, you should support LTNs and ULEZ (like polling shows Londoners do).

I think a lot of this is people applying Coventry/wherever politics to London. London is not a normal British city. It has really low car ownership and a very young and progressive population. Of course it backs these sorts of measures.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
No


People on the lowest incomes in London are more likely to be pedestrians than car owners. If your concern is social justice, you should support LTNs and ULEZ (like polling shows Londoners do).

I think a lot of this is people applying Coventry/wherever politics to London. London is not a normal British city. It has really low car ownership and a very young and progressive population. Of course it backs these sorts of measures.

outer London car ownership isn’t massively different to other cities - 70% have a car
 

TomRad85

Well-Known Member
No


People on the lowest incomes in London are more likely to be pedestrians than car owners. If your concern is social justice, you should support LTNs and ULEZ (like polling shows Londoners do).

I think a lot of this is people applying Coventry/wherever politics to London. London is not a normal British city. It has really low car ownership and a very young and progressive population. Of course it backs these sorts of measures.
It has a young left wing crowd that moved from elsewhere in the country for sure but there's still shit loads of people with cars and it's affecting the poorest that can't afford new ones. LTNs are also a joke as they largely direct traffic away from the desirable roads and completely clog up and pollute the lower income roads.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
It has a young left wing crowd that moved from elsewhere in the country for sure but there's still shit loads of people with cars and it's affecting the poorest that can't afford new ones. LTNs are also a joke as they largely direct traffic away from the desirable roads and completely clog up and pollute the lower income roads.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

The poorest can get a scrap page scheme for their old car. And as I’ve said the actual poorest don’t own cars. And are paying with their health right now.
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
No


People on the lowest incomes in London are more likely to be pedestrians than car owners. If your concern is social justice, you should support LTNs and ULEZ (like polling shows Londoners do).

I think a lot of this is people applying Coventry/wherever politics to London. London is not a normal British city. It has really low car ownership and a very young and progressive population. Of course it backs these sorts of measures.
Though TBF Uxbridge is an outlier, it's miles away from central London and car ownership is 77% of households. It still has far superior public transport mind you compared with anywhere in the provinces.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
outer London car ownership isn’t massively different to other cities - 70% have a car
Yeah and the lower income argument also doesn't take into account that congestion charges by their nature affect lower income car owners - either because their car is considered environmentally unsound so costs more, or because the charge is a larger proportion of income.

It's also aspiration isn't it. OK, a Fiat Strada might not be everyone's desire, but if you take away someone's opportunity to own one if they don't currently, it won't be seen as a good thing.

Rationality vs psyche isn't it.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Though TBF Uxbridge is an outlier, it's miles away from central London and car ownership is 77% of households. It still has far superior public transport mind you compared with anywhere in the provinces.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

Well quite. If someone suggested it here I’d be up in arms, but cry me a river if you can afford to live in Uxbridge and have access to all that public transport.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
This


It is going to disadvantage low earners who own cars and they will have cars that get charged. Also diesel vans for plumbers electricians etc
 

TomRad85

Well-Known Member
You got a source for that? As a whole it’s certainly not true:
View attachment 30807

And as I said ownership skews heavily towards the rich:

View attachment 30808
I think you might be misunderstanding why car ownership is lower though. When you move here as a single person attempting to build a career you really don't need a car, the public transport is fine and income is irrelevant, its simply not necessary. However when you get older, have a kid that needs to go to school, need to shop for more than 1, you need a car just like anywhere else.

Lower income people get cars, just not very good ones, so the ULEZ bollocks hits them the hardest. I used to live just inside the North circular and it was ok for me, our car was fine, but I can assure you there were many people affected by it.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
 

Mcbean

Well-Known Member
This


It is going to disadvantage low earners who own cars and they will have cars that get charged. Also diesel vans for plumbers electricians etc
Exactly this - you only drive in the suburbs to see how many people have cars and vans - London is massive - out to the M25 my BIL is on the border turn right 12.50 thankyou
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Imagine having this little fanny as your MP, it'd be like having PVA or something



Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk


Christ it’s like an apprentice candidate
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
This


It is going to disadvantage low earners who own cars and they will have cars that get charged. Also diesel vans for plumbers electricians etc

Again low earners are least likely to own a car and most likely to be eligible for scrappage.

Plumbers and electricians earn good money and are also eligible for scrappage and schemes to get better work vehicles.

I know the current GB News meme is about banning ICE cars being terrible and the climate crisis is a lie, but back in the real world this stuff has to happen because what you’re not counting in your equation are the people dying from breathing conditions, hit by cars, or just unable to get around because of a car focus pricing them out. And that’s before you get to the climate. And it’s not even all ICE cars anyway!

It sucks that people bought diesel by mistake, lots of fingers to point, but it doesn’t change the fact the mistake needs fixing. Maybe campaign for a diesel scrappage that allows people to upgrade and the govenrment eats the cost?
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
Stop being so needy

Awkward Kenan Thompson GIF by Saturday Night Live
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Again low earners are least likely to own a car and most likely to be eligible for scrappage.

Plumbers and electricians earn good money and are also eligible for scrappage and schemes to get better work vehicles.

I know the current GB News meme is about banning ICE cars being terrible and the climate crisis is a lie, but back in the real world this stuff has to happen because what you’re not counting in your equation are the people dying from breathing conditions, hit by cars, or just unable to get around because of a car focus pricing them out. And that’s before you get to the climate. And it’s not even all ICE cars anyway!

It sucks that people bought diesel by mistake, lots of fingers to point, but it doesn’t change the fact the mistake needs fixing. Maybe campaign for a diesel scrappage that allows people to upgrade and the govenrment eats the cost?

Im finding your argument bizarre. Low earners own exactly the cars that will be penalised here

I’m just showing you 7 out of 10 own a car in London vs 7.8 nationally

Low earners drive old cars - high earners will still be driving their cars into these zones - many self employed labourers have vans - it’s just a lazy generalisation to say they can get a new vehicle as they are all rich - that’s another Zoe moment from you as is anyone owning an old car can get a scrapage replacement - good luck with that

One guy was on 5 live and said he lives just outside it and drives 5 minutes into it to go to sainsburys - now he will drive 20 minutes the other way instead - excellent stuff

Starmer was asked 6 times if he supports the zone. He didn’t give an answer.

I wouldn’t need to replace my diesel - it’s green enough so I could happily drive in it
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
Absolutely no self-reflection. It's as if every voter is a driver and / or even bothered about it. What about the 53% of voters who couldn't even be arsed to turn out? Why is that Kier?
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Scrappage is a bizarre argument if you can't afford the replacement
 

duffer

Well-Known Member
No


People on the lowest incomes in London are more likely to be pedestrians than car owners. If your concern is social justice, you should support LTNs and ULEZ (like polling shows Londoners do).

I think a lot of this is people applying Coventry/wherever politics to London. London is not a normal British city. It has really low car ownership and a very young and progressive population. Of course it backs these sorts of measures.

I used to live and work in this part of London. It's suburban, but it's not all posh and wealthy by any means. Not everyone there works in the City, and there's a fair proportion of stretched lower and middle income people and families who rely on having a car and can't afford to just replace it. It's definitively not like central London in terms of demographics or density of public transport.

Extending ULEZ is a sound concept, but to try to enforce it without adequate support when so many are struggling is always going to result in resistance and Labour can probably expect to get punished for it again in similar parts of outer London.

Combine that with a Labour party that offered no positive reason to vote for them beyond, "we're not Tories", and it's not surprising that the local issue caught the voters attention.

I don't think the result will worry Labour overly, and what you saw from Starmer here (i.e. fuck all), is what you'll see going forward. A policy vacuum, an empty husk, a man who's outstanding talent is not wearing a blue tie. I suspect that has a limited shelf life if he gets in power...
 

Mcbean

Well-Known Member
I used to live and work in this part of London. It's suburban, but it's not all posh and wealthy by any means. Not everyone there works in the City, and there's a fair proportion of stretched lower and middle income people and families who rely on having a car and can't afford to just replace it. It's definitively not like central London in terms of demographics or density of public transport.

Extending ULEZ is a sound concept, but to try to enforce it without adequate support when so many are struggling is always going to result in resistance and Labour can probably expect to get punished for it again in similar parts of outer London.

Combine that with a Labour party that offered no positive reason to vote for them beyond, "we're not Tories", and it's not surprising that the local issue caught the voters attention.

I don't think the result will worry Labour overly, and what you saw from Starmer here (i.e. fuck all), is what you'll see going forward. A policy vacuum, an empty husk, a man who's outstanding talent is not wearing a blue tie. I suspect that has a limited shelf life if he gets in power...
100% re cars and ownership

Starmer will be blaming the tories to infinity and beyond 😳
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
I used to live and work in this part of London. It's suburban, but it's not all posh and wealthy by any means. Not everyone there works in the City, and there's a fair proportion of stretched lower and middle income people and families who rely on having a car and can't afford to just replace it. It's definitively not like central London in terms of demographics or density of public transport.

Extending ULEZ is a sound concept, but to try to enforce it without adequate support when so many are struggling is always going to result in resistance and Labour can probably expect to get punished for it again in similar parts of outer London.

Combine that with a Labour party that offered no positive reason to vote for them beyond, "we're not Tories", and it's not surprising that the local issue caught the voters attention.

I don't think the result will worry Labour overly, and what you saw from Starmer here (i.e. fuck all), is what you'll see going forward. A policy vacuum, an empty husk, a man who's outstanding talent is not wearing a blue tie. I suspect that has a limited shelf life if he gets in power...

It really is miles out, I went to Uxbridge for work a few years ago and stayed in some rooms they let at Brunel University. It was pretty shite for pubs but one of the locals did take us to a really decent indian restaurant. The precinct bit in the centre of Uxbridge was reminiscent of any provincial town tbh.
 

duffer

Well-Known Member
The poorest can get a scrap page scheme for their old car. And as I’ve said the actual poorest don’t own cars. And are paying with their health right now.

The very poorest, those on benefits can get scrappage, £2000. Might be tricky to get a reliable ULEZ compliant motor for that, but regardless that excludes a very large proportion of working families who are already struggling and need their car for work and other purposes. Whether you accept it or not, there's clearly a lot of concern about the policy, and a lot of it is entirely justified imho. If we're serious about saving the environment then we've got to fund it properly rather than putting it on the shoulders of those who are already struggling. Labour have already backed away from that concept, of course.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
The very poorest, those on benefits can get scrappage, £2000. Might be tricky to get a reliable ULEZ compliant motor for that, but regardless that excludes a very large proportion of working families who are already struggling and need their car for work and other purposes. Whether you accept it or not, there's clearly a lot of concern about the policy, and a lot of it is entirely justified imho. If we're serious about saving the environment then we've got to fund it properly rather than putting it on the shoulders of those who are already struggling. Labour have already backed away from that concept, of course.

We absolutely should fund it properly.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Brilliant so anyone who has an old car gets a new one? Everywhere or just London?

Id raise the scrappage amount and yeah I’d do it everywhere. I think it’s only fair when you’re telling people they have to change. And they do have to change.

A Euro 4 emissions classification came in 18 years ago. You’re talking about an absolutely tiny number of cars affected here with limited value.

Even Euro 6 for diesel is 9 years old. Ten by the time anything comes in.
 

duffer

Well-Known Member
It really is miles out, I went to Uxbridge for work a few years ago and stayed in some rooms they let at Brunel University. It was pretty shite for pubs but one of the locals did take us to a really decent indian restaurant. The precinct bit in the centre of Uxbridge was reminiscent of any provincial town tbh.

Spent a few good nights in the SU at Brunel, but that was a long time ago.

Getting into the centre of London was a long old ride on the tube, but a bit like Coventry it was even more painful if you were heading to an adjoining borough because much of the transport was radial (designed to get you in and out of the middle). If you worked somewhere around the edge of town you'd struggle without a car I think, and most people (other than students) seemed to have one.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top