I think he referred to Meat Tax plans which apparentl exist out there somewhere, amongst things he is going to stop that were not going to happen anyway - but did not link it to Labour. Have we all seen the graphic?
He says "we're stopping" measures like "taxes on eating meat" and "compulsory car sharing". The implication ios clearly that unless the Government took action, these measures were going to come in (one could even read it as meaning that the Government planned to introduce them). This is such nonsense that it's boring to even refute it. Something suggested by the odd think-tank or green politician is not "a measure that needs stopping". And actually I'm unaware of a single institute or politician anywhere on the planet who has proposed "compulsory car-sharing". It's just a preposterous pyramid of piffle, as Boris might say.
Not here (yet) but car sharing is compulsory in some States. I've seen it.
"Arizona has HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) lanes. It is illegal to drive in these lanes with less than two people Monday through Friday during the posted times."
Zac Goldsmith was critical of Sunak’s Net Zero policy change. Kemi Badenoch was quoted in the Standard criticising Goldsmith, saying, “Zac Goldsmith is someone who cares very much about the environment,... But the fact is, he has way more money than pretty much everyone in the UK.”
That’s a brave line to take when Rishi Sunak has way more money than Zac Goldsmith!
The theory of “luxury beliefs” is going to be an increasingly important political issue in the next few years.
It starts with mocking those who turn up to climate change summits in private planes, but quickly goes into retail local politics, with Conservatives pointing at Sadiq Khan and Mark Drakeford as evidence that Labour want to make cars something that only the rich have, and everyone else can get the bus.
Same with the ‘meat tax’. Fillet steak and caviar for the climate summit attendees, but bugs and salad for the rest of us.
Sure. If you want to hate your enemies out of fear of the unknown, nobody can stop you. It is an update of the paranoid theories that Jewish monied elites control everything and kill Christian babies.
Oh, the “It’s not really happening, it’s a mad conspiracy theory” argument.
It’s really happening, in the real world.
Please show us your "real world" evidence for Labour's 'meat tax' plans, which Sunak recently referred to ?
The real world seems to be that our PM has engaged in a dishonest smear campaign, which he kicked off just as Parliament went into recess. Neatly avoiding Parliamentary scrutiny of his shoddy policy changes.
Did Sunak specifically refer to Labour’s meat tax plans? I might have missed that.
Labour’s taxes and restrictions on motorists, on the other hand, are very clear for everyone to see in London and Wales.
If he's not talking about Labour's plans, then WTF is he burbling on about ?
Nobody has a clue. Thats why it is being widely and viciously lampooned.
Remember folks - Rishi Sunak is the Prime Minister. If he is defending citizens against these dastardly plans and they actually existed, then they are plans of the government which he is the leader of.
So he is defending us against himself. Is he bipolar?
I think he referred to Meat Tax plans which apparentl exist out there somewhere, amongst things he is going to stop that were not going to happen anyway - but did not link it to Labour. Have we all seen the graphic?
He says "we're stopping" measures like "taxes on eating meat" and "compulsory car sharing". The implication ios clearly that unless the Government took action, these measures were going to come in (one could even read it as meaning that the Government planned to introduce them). This is such nonsense that it's boring to even refute it. Something suggested by the odd think-tank or green politician is not "a measure that needs stopping". And actually I'm unaware of a single institute or politician anywhere on the planet who has proposed "compulsory car-sharing". It's just a preposterous pyramid of piffle, as Boris might say.
Not here (yet) but car sharing is compulsory in some States. I've seen it.
"Arizona has HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) lanes. It is illegal to drive in these lanes with less than two people Monday through Friday during the posted times."
We have bus lanes. Does that make taking the bus compulsory ?
Someone should get Rishi to do something about that encroaching tyranny.
Zac Goldsmith was critical of Sunak’s Net Zero policy change. Kemi Badenoch was quoted in the Standard criticising Goldsmith, saying, “Zac Goldsmith is someone who cares very much about the environment,... But the fact is, he has way more money than pretty much everyone in the UK.”
That’s a brave line to take when Rishi Sunak has way more money than Zac Goldsmith!
The theory of “luxury beliefs” is going to be an increasingly important political issue in the next few years.
It starts with mocking those who turn up to climate change summits in private planes, but quickly goes into retail local politics, with Conservatives pointing at Sadiq Khan and Mark Drakeford as evidence that Labour want to make cars something that only the rich have, and everyone else can get the bus.
Same with the ‘meat tax’. Fillet steak and caviar for the climate summit attendees, but bugs and salad for the rest of us.
Sure. If you want to hate your enemies out of fear of the unknown, nobody can stop you. It is an update of the paranoid theories that Jewish monied elites control everything and kill Christian babies.
Oh, the “It’s not really happening, it’s a mad conspiracy theory” argument.
It’s really happening, in the real world.
Please show us your "real world" evidence for Labour's 'meat tax' plans, which Sunak recently referred to ?
The real world seems to be that our PM has engaged in a dishonest smear campaign, which he kicked off just as Parliament went into recess. Neatly avoiding Parliamentary scrutiny of his shoddy policy changes.
Did Sunak specifically refer to Labour’s meat tax plans? I might have missed that.
Labour’s taxes and restrictions on motorists, on the other hand, are very clear for everyone to see in London and Wales.
If he's not talking about Labour's plans, then WTF is he burbling on about ?
At best, exaggerated wibble. At worst, made up wibble.
The Climate Change Committee talked about government encouraging people to eat less meat, but didn't say through taxes. Same for car sharing. There's just enough truth to cover the fabrication.
Rishi wants to be like Boris, he wants to be like Dom. But without their charisma (and in their different ways, they had the charisma to largely avoid being called out on lies), he just sounds dishonest.
Maybe there is something in the charisma theory. But if the causality goes "a charismatic leader can get away with bigger lies and that's why they win", that's depressing.
I think he referred to Meat Tax plans which apparentl exist out there somewhere, amongst things he is going to stop that were not going to happen anyway - but did not link it to Labour. Have we all seen the graphic?
He says "we're stopping" measures like "taxes on eating meat" and "compulsory car sharing". The implication ios clearly that unless the Government took action, these measures were going to come in (one could even read it as meaning that the Government planned to introduce them). This is such nonsense that it's boring to even refute it. Something suggested by the odd think-tank or green politician is not "a measure that needs stopping". And actually I'm unaware of a single institute or politician anywhere on the planet who has proposed "compulsory car-sharing". It's just a preposterous pyramid of piffle, as Boris might say.
Not here (yet) but car sharing is compulsory in some States. I've seen it.
"Arizona has HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) lanes. It is illegal to drive in these lanes with less than two people Monday through Friday during the posted times."
How does that make it mandatory? The carpool lane is a bonus fast/traffic free lane for people who have more than one person in the car. It's a good idea though abused quite a lot lol.
If Labour can frame green issues in a more local/tangible way I reckon they’ll be onto a winner.
It’s hard to see a global increase of 0.3°; it is much easier to see your rivers being filled with sewage and your beaches covered in dead sealife.
My pet theory is that most people really do care about environmental issues, but are turned off by global intangibles. Labour’s job is to frame the argument correctly.
Most people do care, but they don’t want to wear hair shirts.
Although for many people 'wear hair shirts' would more accurately be phrased as 'do much about it'.
These are the target voters for Sunak's anti-green pivot. Not so much the actual measures but the underlying message.
I think he referred to Meat Tax plans which apparentl exist out there somewhere, amongst things he is going to stop that were not going to happen anyway - but did not link it to Labour. Have we all seen the graphic?
He says "we're stopping" measures like "taxes on eating meat" and "compulsory car sharing". The implication ios clearly that unless the Government took action, these measures were going to come in (one could even read it as meaning that the Government planned to introduce them). This is such nonsense that it's boring to even refute it. Something suggested by the odd think-tank or green politician is not "a measure that needs stopping". And actually I'm unaware of a single institute or politician anywhere on the planet who has proposed "compulsory car-sharing". It's just a preposterous pyramid of piffle, as Boris might say.
Not here (yet) but car sharing is compulsory in some States. I've seen it.
"Arizona has HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) lanes. It is illegal to drive in these lanes with less than two people Monday through Friday during the posted times."
How does that make it mandatory? The carpool lane is a bonus fast/traffic free lane for people who have more than one person in the car. It's a good idea though abused quite a lot lol.
HOV lanes keep “Adult Stores” in business in the US.
And some bad news for Wales.... Superstar Louis Rees Zammit has been banned from playing in Wales home games for the 2023-24 season. He was clocked at 24.6 mph during Wales recent win against Portugal, which exceeds the new Welsh speed restrictions. First Minister Mark Drakeford said 'This young mans reckless behaviour sets a terrible example for other players which endangers not just other players and officials but the 74,000 spectators inside the stadium'. As well as the ban, he will have to attend a Slow Speed School which has already been pioneered by Steve Borthwick.
I've been trying to get my head around this interactive map of the new speed limits, and I'm baffled.
The A493 from Tywyn to Dolgellau goes through a number of small villages. One of them is my old stamping ground of Llwyngwril.
If I read the map aright, they have kept the limit at 30 from Llangelynin to Llwyngwril, reduced it to 20 at Llwyngwril itself, *kept it at 20* from Llwyngwril to Friog, and *increased* it to 30 going through Friog itself.
If correct, that's madness.
And if not, the map can't be relied on.
But there, Drakeford couldn't even spell Llwyngwril.
There are quite a few anomalies, although that is the work of the individual council. The Vale Council have managed the transition very well. I was in Pembrokeshire earlier in the week and between Haverfordwest and Milford Haven the speed limit is 20 through Johnston which is insanely slow. Your post nonetheless puts pay to BigG's assertion than there is a blanket reduction.
Personally I am not averse to the changes when implemented sensibly, but it does play into Rishi's new role as the poor motorist's friend. The 20 policy, like ULEZ, both of which the Conservatives claim to hate, despite having their fingerprints all over them play into Rishi's rather clever, if cynical and untrue narrative that Labour will repossess everyone's ICE cars on January 1, 2030. I think we would all laugh out loud if Drakeford delivered Rishi a magnificent and comprehensive victory at the next GE.
I would be amused, but I don't see a Conservative government in the UK or Wales reversing such a policy. They may try to weaponise the issue as a last throw of the dice for the next Election, but they won't want to be seen making our roads more dangerous, especially for pedestrians - even though they have do-nothing policies on road safety improvement.
We already have the data from extended periods of time that wider programmes of lower speed limits in residential areas significantly improve road safety. Take Hull, mentioned in the relevant ROSPA paper:
From 1994, there was a widespread introduction of 20mph zones in Hull, and by 2003, there were 120 zones covering 500 streets. The casualty statistics between 1994 and 2001 showed a drop of 14% in Hull, compared to a rise of 1.5% in the rest of Yorkshire and Humberside. In the 20mph zones in Hull, there was a decrease in total accidents of 56% and in fatal and serious injuries of 90%. The biggest reductions were pedestrian casualties, which fell by 54%, child casualties, which dropped by 54% and child pedestrian casualties, which fell by 74%. These figures were reported in Local Transport Today https://www.rospa.com/media/documents/road-safety/20mph-zones-and-speed-limits-factsheet.pdf
We already have a large number of Local Highways Authorities that have implemented 20mph limits quite widely.
Does anyone have examples of large scale reversal of such policies once implemented? .
I think he referred to Meat Tax plans which apparentl exist out there somewhere, amongst things he is going to stop that were not going to happen anyway - but did not link it to Labour. Have we all seen the graphic?
He says "we're stopping" measures like "taxes on eating meat" and "compulsory car sharing". The implication ios clearly that unless the Government took action, these measures were going to come in (one could even read it as meaning that the Government planned to introduce them). This is such nonsense that it's boring to even refute it. Something suggested by the odd think-tank or green politician is not "a measure that needs stopping". And actually I'm unaware of a single institute or politician anywhere on the planet who has proposed "compulsory car-sharing". It's just a preposterous pyramid of piffle, as Boris might say.
Not here (yet) but car sharing is compulsory in some States. I've seen it.
"Arizona has HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) lanes. It is illegal to drive in these lanes with less than two people Monday through Friday during the posted times."
How does that make it mandatory? The carpool lane is a bonus fast/traffic free lane for people who have more than one person in the car. It's a good idea though abused quite a lot lol.
It's bugger all to do with climate change anyway. They've had them since the 80s, as a measure to try to reduce congestion.
If Labour can frame green issues in a more local/tangible way I reckon they’ll be onto a winner.
It’s hard to see a global increase of 0.3°; it is much easier to see your rivers being filled with sewage and your beaches covered in dead sealife.
My pet theory is that most people really do care about environmental issues, but are turned off by global intangibles. Labour’s job is to frame the argument correctly.
Most people do care, but they don’t want to wear hair shirts.
Although for many people 'wear hair shirts' would more accurately be phrased as 'do much about it'.
These are the target voters for Sunak's anti-green pivot. Not so much the actual measures but the underlying message.
If Labour can frame green issues in a more local/tangible way I reckon they’ll be onto a winner.
It’s hard to see a global increase of 0.3°; it is much easier to see your rivers being filled with sewage and your beaches covered in dead sealife.
My pet theory is that most people really do care about environmental issues, but are turned off by global intangibles. Labour’s job is to frame the argument correctly.
Most people do care, but they don’t want to wear hair shirts.
I had to rebut an "idea" of a vegetarian only main course at an industry dinner on Monday, I'm a member of the planning committee.
I said it would risk patronising and alienating people, and many wouldn't come again.
Is the problem that it would be telegraphed in an earnest, virtue-signally way?
I mean, if it was an informal occasion and the food was, say, pizza and salad with no patronising bollux attached you wouldn't mind would you?
There's that too.
This stuff really yanks people's chain, but they complain in private (and vote with their feet) lest they come across as a denier or uncommitted.
And some bad news for Wales.... Superstar Louis Rees Zammit has been banned from playing in Wales home games for the 2023-24 season. He was clocked at 24.6 mph during Wales recent win against Portugal, which exceeds the new Welsh speed restrictions. First Minister Mark Drakeford said 'This young mans reckless behaviour sets a terrible example for other players which endangers not just other players and officials but the 74,000 spectators inside the stadium'. As well as the ban, he will have to attend a Slow Speed School which has already been pioneered by Steve Borthwick.
I've been trying to get my head around this interactive map of the new speed limits, and I'm baffled.
The A493 from Tywyn to Dolgellau goes through a number of small villages. One of them is my old stamping ground of Llwyngwril.
If I read the map aright, they have kept the limit at 30 from Llangelynin to Llwyngwril, reduced it to 20 at Llwyngwril itself, *kept it at 20* from Llwyngwril to Friog, and *increased* it to 30 going through Friog itself.
If correct, that's madness.
And if not, the map can't be relied on.
But there, Drakeford couldn't even spell Llwyngwril.
There are quite a few anomalies, although that is the work of the individual council. The Vale Council have managed the transition very well. I was in Pembrokeshire earlier in the week and between Haverfordwest and Milford Haven the speed limit is 20 through Johnston which is insanely slow. Your post nonetheless puts pay to BigG's assertion than there is a blanket reduction.
Personally I am not averse to the changes when implemented sensibly, but it does play into Rishi's new role as the poor motorist's friend. The 20 policy, like ULEZ, both of which the Conservatives claim to hate, despite having their fingerprints all over them play into Rishi's rather clever, if cynical and untrue narrative that Labour will repossess everyone's ICE cars on January 1, 2030. I think we would all laugh out loud if Drakeford delivered Rishi a magnificent and comprehensive victory at the next GE.
I would be amused, but I don't see a Conservative government in the UK or Wales reversing such a policy. They may try to weaponise the issue as a last throw of the dice for the next Election, but they won't want to be seen making our roads more dangerous, especially for pedestrians - even though they have do-nothing policies on road safety improvement.
We already have the data from extended periods of time that wider programmes of lower speed limits in residential areas significantly improve road safety. Take Hull, mentioned in the relevant ROSPA paper:
From 1994, there was a widespread introduction of 20mph zones in Hull, and by 2003, there were 120 zones covering 500 streets. The casualty statistics between 1994 and 2001 showed a drop of 14% in Hull, compared to a rise of 1.5% in the rest of Yorkshire and Humberside. In the 20mph zones in Hull, there was a decrease in total accidents of 56% and in fatal and serious injuries of 90%. The biggest reductions were pedestrian casualties, which fell by 54%, child casualties, which dropped by 54% and child pedestrian casualties, which fell by 74%. These figures were reported in Local Transport Today https://www.rospa.com/media/documents/road-safety/20mph-zones-and-speed-limits-factsheet.pdf
We already have a large number of Local Highways Authorities that have implemented 20mph limits quite widely.
Does anyone have examples of large scale reversal of such policies once implemented? .
A lot of poorer people in parts of London (such as Tower Hamlets) live in houses/flats directly onto major roads. For them, people "rat running" through leafy, residential neighbourhoods is a good thing.
And some bad news for Wales.... Superstar Louis Rees Zammit has been banned from playing in Wales home games for the 2023-24 season. He was clocked at 24.6 mph during Wales recent win against Portugal, which exceeds the new Welsh speed restrictions. First Minister Mark Drakeford said 'This young mans reckless behaviour sets a terrible example for other players which endangers not just other players and officials but the 74,000 spectators inside the stadium'. As well as the ban, he will have to attend a Slow Speed School which has already been pioneered by Steve Borthwick.
I've been trying to get my head around this interactive map of the new speed limits, and I'm baffled.
The A493 from Tywyn to Dolgellau goes through a number of small villages. One of them is my old stamping ground of Llwyngwril.
If I read the map aright, they have kept the limit at 30 from Llangelynin to Llwyngwril, reduced it to 20 at Llwyngwril itself, *kept it at 20* from Llwyngwril to Friog, and *increased* it to 30 going through Friog itself.
If correct, that's madness.
And if not, the map can't be relied on.
But there, Drakeford couldn't even spell Llwyngwril.
There are quite a few anomalies, although that is the work of the individual council. The Vale Council have managed the transition very well. I was in Pembrokeshire earlier in the week and between Haverfordwest and Milford Haven the speed limit is 20 through Johnston which is insanely slow. Your post nonetheless puts pay to BigG's assertion than there is a blanket reduction.
Personally I am not averse to the changes when implemented sensibly, but it does play into Rishi's new role as the poor motorist's friend. The 20 policy, like ULEZ, both of which the Conservatives claim to hate, despite having their fingerprints all over them play into Rishi's rather clever, if cynical and untrue narrative that Labour will repossess everyone's ICE cars on January 1, 2030. I think we would all laugh out loud if Drakeford delivered Rishi a magnificent and comprehensive victory at the next GE.
I would be amused, but I don't see a Conservative government in the UK or Wales reversing such a policy. They may try to weaponise the issue as a last throw of the dice for the next Election, but they won't want to be seen making our roads more dangerous, especially for pedestrians - even though they have do-nothing policies on road safety improvement.
We already have the data from extended periods of time that wider programmes of lower speed limits in residential areas significantly improve road safety. Take Hull, mentioned in the relevant ROSPA paper:
From 1994, there was a widespread introduction of 20mph zones in Hull, and by 2003, there were 120 zones covering 500 streets. The casualty statistics between 1994 and 2001 showed a drop of 14% in Hull, compared to a rise of 1.5% in the rest of Yorkshire and Humberside. In the 20mph zones in Hull, there was a decrease in total accidents of 56% and in fatal and serious injuries of 90%. The biggest reductions were pedestrian casualties, which fell by 54%, child casualties, which dropped by 54% and child pedestrian casualties, which fell by 74%. These figures were reported in Local Transport Today https://www.rospa.com/media/documents/road-safety/20mph-zones-and-speed-limits-factsheet.pdf
We already have a large number of Local Highways Authorities that have implemented 20mph limits quite widely.
Does anyone have examples of large scale reversal of such policies once implemented? .
And some bad news for Wales.... Superstar Louis Rees Zammit has been banned from playing in Wales home games for the 2023-24 season. He was clocked at 24.6 mph during Wales recent win against Portugal, which exceeds the new Welsh speed restrictions. First Minister Mark Drakeford said 'This young mans reckless behaviour sets a terrible example for other players which endangers not just other players and officials but the 74,000 spectators inside the stadium'. As well as the ban, he will have to attend a Slow Speed School which has already been pioneered by Steve Borthwick.
I've been trying to get my head around this interactive map of the new speed limits, and I'm baffled.
The A493 from Tywyn to Dolgellau goes through a number of small villages. One of them is my old stamping ground of Llwyngwril.
If I read the map aright, they have kept the limit at 30 from Llangelynin to Llwyngwril, reduced it to 20 at Llwyngwril itself, *kept it at 20* from Llwyngwril to Friog, and *increased* it to 30 going through Friog itself.
If correct, that's madness.
And if not, the map can't be relied on.
But there, Drakeford couldn't even spell Llwyngwril.
There are quite a few anomalies, although that is the work of the individual council. The Vale Council have managed the transition very well. I was in Pembrokeshire earlier in the week and between Haverfordwest and Milford Haven the speed limit is 20 through Johnston which is insanely slow. Your post nonetheless puts pay to BigG's assertion than there is a blanket reduction.
Personally I am not averse to the changes when implemented sensibly, but it does play into Rishi's new role as the poor motorist's friend. The 20 policy, like ULEZ, both of which the Conservatives claim to hate, despite having their fingerprints all over them play into Rishi's rather clever, if cynical and untrue narrative that Labour will repossess everyone's ICE cars on January 1, 2030. I think we would all laugh out loud if Drakeford delivered Rishi a magnificent and comprehensive victory at the next GE.
I would be amused, but I don't see a Conservative government in the UK or Wales reversing such a policy. They may try to weaponise the issue as a last throw of the dice for the next Election, but they won't want to be seen making our roads more dangerous, especially for pedestrians - even though they have do-nothing policies on road safety improvement.
We already have the data from extended periods of time that wider programmes of lower speed limits in residential areas significantly improve road safety. Take Hull, mentioned in the relevant ROSPA paper:
From 1994, there was a widespread introduction of 20mph zones in Hull, and by 2003, there were 120 zones covering 500 streets. The casualty statistics between 1994 and 2001 showed a drop of 14% in Hull, compared to a rise of 1.5% in the rest of Yorkshire and Humberside. In the 20mph zones in Hull, there was a decrease in total accidents of 56% and in fatal and serious injuries of 90%. The biggest reductions were pedestrian casualties, which fell by 54%, child casualties, which dropped by 54% and child pedestrian casualties, which fell by 74%. These figures were reported in Local Transport Today https://www.rospa.com/media/documents/road-safety/20mph-zones-and-speed-limits-factsheet.pdf
We already have a large number of Local Highways Authorities that have implemented 20mph limits quite widely.
Does anyone have examples of large scale reversal of such policies once implemented? .
I suspect, and don't forget this is the week for making up non-policies and repealing them, if the Conservatives win the next election, which I suspect is likely, it will be the most fiscally right wing government we have seen, and as a sop to Braverman and Mogg probably the most socially right wing government too. One has to laugh if Drakeford furnishes the victory.
We'll have to see - however the Welsh measures are devolved, and similar measures where they have been introduced by LHAs in England are under existing powers.
As I say, I could see them stopping progress and eg not changing the default speed limit across England, but I don't see them restoring higher speed limits to all the existing measures in the LHAs that have already put them in place.
Labour angry over Lib Dem leaflet, threatening to go to the Police, usually that is a sign of a campaign under threat or in trouble. Looking at the leaflet there does not appear to be anything wrong, it just does not say Labour and Cons tied and Lib Dems close behind. It focuses on Lib Dem/Tory votes up significantly, Labour almost at a standstill, since the previous Labour commissioned poll. Anyway that was yesterday, today another day,another dollar.
The police must hate elections, particularly by-elections because they get contacted for all sorts of trivia and nonsense. Unfortunately that also means that when something really is wrong they assume it is another case of nonsense (I have been involved in a real election fraud, as a witness I should emphasize).
One of my favourites was one of our deliverers being reported to the police for stealing a pair of trainers from outside a house. The response was that it seemed unlikely that the Head of the local Comprehensive would nick a pair of trainers from outside a house. He had much better opportunities in his work environment.
What a great innovation! I might get this. The worst thing about Monopoly was the interminable faffing around with stupid slips of paper – and your scurrilous cousin stealing from you when your back was turned. Great to see that Hasbro has seen the light!
Labour angry over Lib Dem leaflet, threatening to go to the Police, usually that is a sign of a campaign under threat or in trouble. Looking at the leaflet there does not appear to be anything wrong, it just does not say Labour and Cons tied and Lib Dems close behind. It focuses on Lib Dem/Tory votes up significantly, Labour almost at a standstill, since the previous Labour commissioned poll. Anyway that was yesterday, today another day,another dollar.
The police must hate elections, particularly by-elections because they get contacted for all sorts of trivia and nonsense. Unfortunately that also means that when something really is wrong they assume it is another case of nonsense (I have been involved in a real election fraud, as a witness I should emphasize).
One of my favourites was one of our deliverers being reported to the police for stealing a pair of trainers from outside a house. The response was that it seemed unlikely that the Head of the local Comprehensive would nick a pair of trainers from outside a house. He had much better opportunities in his work environment.
The lost property room/cupboard of any school typically holds enough to clothe and shod half the school.
If Labour can frame green issues in a more local/tangible way I reckon they’ll be onto a winner.
It’s hard to see a global increase of 0.3°; it is much easier to see your rivers being filled with sewage and your beaches covered in dead sealife.
My pet theory is that most people really do care about environmental issues, but are turned off by global intangibles. Labour’s job is to frame the argument correctly.
Most people do care, but they don’t want to wear hair shirts.
I had to rebut an "idea" of a vegetarian only main course at an industry dinner on Monday, I'm a member of the planning committee.
I said it would risk patronising and alienating people, and many wouldn't come again.
Is the problem that it would be telegraphed in an earnest, virtue-signally way?
I mean, if it was an informal occasion and the food was, say, pizza and salad with no patronising bollux attached you wouldn't mind would you?
There's that too.
This stuff really yanks people's chain, but they complain in private (and vote with their feet) lest they come across as a denier or uncommitted.
It is very unpopular.
Yeah we had something similar at work, a poor idea just moving through the committees with no one objecting but as soon as someone did a few other people felt like they could speak up and then suddenly management realised just how unpopular their idea was so they reversed it.
And some bad news for Wales.... Superstar Louis Rees Zammit has been banned from playing in Wales home games for the 2023-24 season. He was clocked at 24.6 mph during Wales recent win against Portugal, which exceeds the new Welsh speed restrictions. First Minister Mark Drakeford said 'This young mans reckless behaviour sets a terrible example for other players which endangers not just other players and officials but the 74,000 spectators inside the stadium'. As well as the ban, he will have to attend a Slow Speed School which has already been pioneered by Steve Borthwick.
I've been trying to get my head around this interactive map of the new speed limits, and I'm baffled.
The A493 from Tywyn to Dolgellau goes through a number of small villages. One of them is my old stamping ground of Llwyngwril.
If I read the map aright, they have kept the limit at 30 from Llangelynin to Llwyngwril, reduced it to 20 at Llwyngwril itself, *kept it at 20* from Llwyngwril to Friog, and *increased* it to 30 going through Friog itself.
If correct, that's madness.
And if not, the map can't be relied on.
But there, Drakeford couldn't even spell Llwyngwril.
There are quite a few anomalies, although that is the work of the individual council. The Vale Council have managed the transition very well. I was in Pembrokeshire earlier in the week and between Haverfordwest and Milford Haven the speed limit is 20 through Johnston which is insanely slow. Your post nonetheless puts pay to BigG's assertion than there is a blanket reduction.
Personally I am not averse to the changes when implemented sensibly, but it does play into Rishi's new role as the poor motorist's friend. The 20 policy, like ULEZ, both of which the Conservatives claim to hate, despite having their fingerprints all over them play into Rishi's rather clever, if cynical and untrue narrative that Labour will repossess everyone's ICE cars on January 1, 2030. I think we would all laugh out loud if Drakeford delivered Rishi a magnificent and comprehensive victory at the next GE.
I would be amused, but I don't see a Conservative government in the UK or Wales reversing such a policy. They may try to weaponise the issue as a last throw of the dice for the next Election, but they won't want to be seen making our roads more dangerous, especially for pedestrians - even though they have do-nothing policies on road safety improvement.
We already have the data from extended periods of time that wider programmes of lower speed limits in residential areas significantly improve road safety. Take Hull, mentioned in the relevant ROSPA paper:
From 1994, there was a widespread introduction of 20mph zones in Hull, and by 2003, there were 120 zones covering 500 streets. The casualty statistics between 1994 and 2001 showed a drop of 14% in Hull, compared to a rise of 1.5% in the rest of Yorkshire and Humberside. In the 20mph zones in Hull, there was a decrease in total accidents of 56% and in fatal and serious injuries of 90%. The biggest reductions were pedestrian casualties, which fell by 54%, child casualties, which dropped by 54% and child pedestrian casualties, which fell by 74%. These figures were reported in Local Transport Today https://www.rospa.com/media/documents/road-safety/20mph-zones-and-speed-limits-factsheet.pdf
We already have a large number of Local Highways Authorities that have implemented 20mph limits quite widely.
Does anyone have examples of large scale reversal of such policies once implemented? .
Cash? I drove to Glasgow and back yesterday for a business meeting. Forgot my wallet. Happily navigated around, paid for items, even got signed into Costco just using my phone.
Cash? I drove to Glasgow and back yesterday for a business meeting. Forgot my wallet. Happily navigated around, paid for items, even got signed into Costco just using my phone.
Liberating...
Try using your wallet as a satnav when you forget your phone!
If Labour can frame green issues in a more local/tangible way I reckon they’ll be onto a winner.
It’s hard to see a global increase of 0.3°; it is much easier to see your rivers being filled with sewage and your beaches covered in dead sealife.
My pet theory is that most people really do care about environmental issues, but are turned off by global intangibles. Labour’s job is to frame the argument correctly.
Most people do care, but they don’t want to wear hair shirts.
I had to rebut an "idea" of a vegetarian only main course at an industry dinner on Monday, I'm a member of the planning committee.
I said it would risk patronising and alienating people, and many wouldn't come again.
You could compromise and have venison (and for anyone who didn't read that thread 'What?' is the correct response)
Cash? I drove to Glasgow and back yesterday for a business meeting. Forgot my wallet. Happily navigated around, paid for items, even got signed into Costco just using my phone.
Liberating...
Unless the electronic systems break down for some reason.
And some bad news for Wales.... Superstar Louis Rees Zammit has been banned from playing in Wales home games for the 2023-24 season. He was clocked at 24.6 mph during Wales recent win against Portugal, which exceeds the new Welsh speed restrictions. First Minister Mark Drakeford said 'This young mans reckless behaviour sets a terrible example for other players which endangers not just other players and officials but the 74,000 spectators inside the stadium'. As well as the ban, he will have to attend a Slow Speed School which has already been pioneered by Steve Borthwick.
I've been trying to get my head around this interactive map of the new speed limits, and I'm baffled.
The A493 from Tywyn to Dolgellau goes through a number of small villages. One of them is my old stamping ground of Llwyngwril.
If I read the map aright, they have kept the limit at 30 from Llangelynin to Llwyngwril, reduced it to 20 at Llwyngwril itself, *kept it at 20* from Llwyngwril to Friog, and *increased* it to 30 going through Friog itself.
If correct, that's madness.
And if not, the map can't be relied on.
But there, Drakeford couldn't even spell Llwyngwril.
There are quite a few anomalies, although that is the work of the individual council. The Vale Council have managed the transition very well. I was in Pembrokeshire earlier in the week and between Haverfordwest and Milford Haven the speed limit is 20 through Johnston which is insanely slow. Your post nonetheless puts pay to BigG's assertion than there is a blanket reduction.
Personally I am not averse to the changes when implemented sensibly, but it does play into Rishi's new role as the poor motorist's friend. The 20 policy, like ULEZ, both of which the Conservatives claim to hate, despite having their fingerprints all over them play into Rishi's rather clever, if cynical and untrue narrative that Labour will repossess everyone's ICE cars on January 1, 2030. I think we would all laugh out loud if Drakeford delivered Rishi a magnificent and comprehensive victory at the next GE.
I would be amused, but I don't see a Conservative government in the UK or Wales reversing such a policy. They may try to weaponise the issue as a last throw of the dice for the next Election, but they won't want to be seen making our roads more dangerous, especially for pedestrians - even though they have do-nothing policies on road safety improvement.
We already have the data from extended periods of time that wider programmes of lower speed limits in residential areas significantly improve road safety. Take Hull, mentioned in the relevant ROSPA paper:
From 1994, there was a widespread introduction of 20mph zones in Hull, and by 2003, there were 120 zones covering 500 streets. The casualty statistics between 1994 and 2001 showed a drop of 14% in Hull, compared to a rise of 1.5% in the rest of Yorkshire and Humberside. In the 20mph zones in Hull, there was a decrease in total accidents of 56% and in fatal and serious injuries of 90%. The biggest reductions were pedestrian casualties, which fell by 54%, child casualties, which dropped by 54% and child pedestrian casualties, which fell by 74%. These figures were reported in Local Transport Today https://www.rospa.com/media/documents/road-safety/20mph-zones-and-speed-limits-factsheet.pdf
We already have a large number of Local Highways Authorities that have implemented 20mph limits quite widely.
Does anyone have examples of large scale reversal of such policies once implemented? .
Zac Goldsmith was critical of Sunak’s Net Zero policy change. Kemi Badenoch was quoted in the Standard criticising Goldsmith, saying, “Zac Goldsmith is someone who cares very much about the environment,... But the fact is, he has way more money than pretty much everyone in the UK.”
That’s a brave line to take when Rishi Sunak has way more money than Zac Goldsmith!
The theory of “luxury beliefs” is going to be an increasingly important political issue in the next few years.
It starts with mocking those who turn up to climate change summits in private planes, but quickly goes into retail local politics, with Conservatives pointing at Sadiq Khan and Mark Drakeford as evidence that Labour want to make cars something that only the rich have, and everyone else can get the bus.
Same with the ‘meat tax’. Fillet steak and caviar for the climate summit attendees, but bugs and salad for the rest of us.
Sure. If you want to hate your enemies out of fear of the unknown, nobody can stop you. It is an update of the paranoid theories that Jewish monied elites control everything and kill Christian babies.
Oh, the “It’s not really happening, it’s a mad conspiracy theory” argument.
It’s really happening, in the real world.
Please show us your "real world" evidence for Labour's 'meat tax' plans, which Sunak recently referred to ?
The real world seems to be that our PM has engaged in a dishonest smear campaign, which he kicked off just as Parliament went into recess. Neatly avoiding Parliamentary scrutiny of his shoddy policy changes.
Did Sunak specifically refer to Labour’s meat tax plans? I might have missed that.
Labour’s taxes and restrictions on motorists, on the other hand, are very clear for everyone to see in London and Wales.
I think he referred to Meat Tax plans which apparentl exist out there somewhere, amongst the other things he is going to stop that were not going to happen anyway - but did not link it to Labour.
Of course there is currently no meat tax nor plans but it is dishonest to pretend this is not something that is being considered or looked at by policy makers or influencers in the environmental debate. Labour does not have a meat tax plan, I did not hear him make that claim.
There are currently no firm policies on many issues. It does not mean they are not being reviewed, looked at or discussed by various policy framing organisations.
The framing was Labour would inflict these new taxes and onerous measures on you . Sunak pretends he’s different to Johnson but is the same liar just dressed in a better suit .
Rishi’s suits look terrible, given how much he must be paying for them.
Yes, it's often struck me that Sunak's tailor is running a nice little scam there.
The Tories have gained a council seat from the SNP in Girvan and South Carrick, South Ayrshire. They got 47.5% on first preferences, and reached 54% on the 4th count.
Conservative Alan Lamont is elected at the fourth stage. Interestingly the second preference votes saw Conservatives pick up 151 to SNPs 150 from those who chose Labour with their first preference."
Cash? I drove to Glasgow and back yesterday for a business meeting. Forgot my wallet. Happily navigated around, paid for items, even got signed into Costco just using my phone.
Liberating...
Unless the electronic systems break down for some reason.
There'd be a humungous queue at Costco for Fuel if that happened. Unfortunately you can't use your phone to pay for fuel there though - has to be a card pushed in.
If Labour can frame green issues in a more local/tangible way I reckon they’ll be onto a winner.
It’s hard to see a global increase of 0.3°; it is much easier to see your rivers being filled with sewage and your beaches covered in dead sealife.
My pet theory is that most people really do care about environmental issues, but are turned off by global intangibles. Labour’s job is to frame the argument correctly.
Most people do care, but they don’t want to wear hair shirts.
I had to rebut an "idea" of a vegetarian only main course at an industry dinner on Monday, I'm a member of the planning committee.
I said it would risk patronising and alienating people, and many wouldn't come again.
Is the problem that it would be telegraphed in an earnest, virtue-signally way?
I mean, if it was an informal occasion and the food was, say, pizza and salad with no patronising bollux attached you wouldn't mind would you?
There's that too.
This stuff really yanks people's chain, but they complain in private (and vote with their feet) lest they come across as a denier or uncommitted.
It is very unpopular.
Yeah we had something similar at work, a poor idea just moving through the committees with no one objecting but as soon as someone did a few other people felt like they could speak up and then suddenly management realised just how unpopular their idea was so they reversed it.
Yes not uncommon. Like @Anabobazina I wouldn't mind a veggie main meal even though I am a meat eater. I would draw the line at vegan as that in my opinion would put people off and definitely question the motives of that being proposed so @Casino_Royale probably has a decent point for those who don't want a veggie meal forced upon them.
If Labour can frame green issues in a more local/tangible way I reckon they’ll be onto a winner.
It’s hard to see a global increase of 0.3°; it is much easier to see your rivers being filled with sewage and your beaches covered in dead sealife.
My pet theory is that most people really do care about environmental issues, but are turned off by global intangibles. Labour’s job is to frame the argument correctly.
Most people do care, but they don’t want to wear hair shirts.
I had to rebut an "idea" of a vegetarian only main course at an industry dinner on Monday, I'm a member of the planning committee.
I said it would risk patronising and alienating people, and many wouldn't come again.
Is the problem that it would be telegraphed in an earnest, virtue-signally way?
I mean, if it was an informal occasion and the food was, say, pizza and salad with no patronising bollux attached you wouldn't mind would you?
There's that too.
This stuff really yanks people's chain, but they complain in private (and vote with their feet) lest they come across as a denier or uncommitted.
It is very unpopular.
Actually, deep down, everybody thinks just like me but they don't like to admit it.
I think he referred to Meat Tax plans which apparentl exist out there somewhere, amongst things he is going to stop that were not going to happen anyway - but did not link it to Labour. Have we all seen the graphic?
He says "we're stopping" measures like "taxes on eating meat" and "compulsory car sharing". The implication ios clearly that unless the Government took action, these measures were going to come in (one could even read it as meaning that the Government planned to introduce them). This is such nonsense that it's boring to even refute it. Something suggested by the odd think-tank or green politician is not "a measure that needs stopping". And actually I'm unaware of a single institute or politician anywhere on the planet who has proposed "compulsory car-sharing". It's just a preposterous pyramid of piffle, as Boris might say.
Not here (yet) but car sharing is compulsory in some States. I've seen it.
"Arizona has HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) lanes. It is illegal to drive in these lanes with less than two people Monday through Friday during the posted times."
How does that make it mandatory? The carpool lane is a bonus fast/traffic free lane for people who have more than one person in the car. It's a good idea though abused quite a lot lol.
It's bugger all to do with climate change anyway. They've had them since the 80s, as a measure to try to reduce congestion.
And some bad news for Wales.... Superstar Louis Rees Zammit has been banned from playing in Wales home games for the 2023-24 season. He was clocked at 24.6 mph during Wales recent win against Portugal, which exceeds the new Welsh speed restrictions. First Minister Mark Drakeford said 'This young mans reckless behaviour sets a terrible example for other players which endangers not just other players and officials but the 74,000 spectators inside the stadium'. As well as the ban, he will have to attend a Slow Speed School which has already been pioneered by Steve Borthwick.
I've been trying to get my head around this interactive map of the new speed limits, and I'm baffled.
The A493 from Tywyn to Dolgellau goes through a number of small villages. One of them is my old stamping ground of Llwyngwril.
If I read the map aright, they have kept the limit at 30 from Llangelynin to Llwyngwril, reduced it to 20 at Llwyngwril itself, *kept it at 20* from Llwyngwril to Friog, and *increased* it to 30 going through Friog itself.
If correct, that's madness.
And if not, the map can't be relied on.
But there, Drakeford couldn't even spell Llwyngwril.
There are quite a few anomalies, although that is the work of the individual council. The Vale Council have managed the transition very well. I was in Pembrokeshire earlier in the week and between Haverfordwest and Milford Haven the speed limit is 20 through Johnston which is insanely slow. Your post nonetheless puts pay to BigG's assertion than there is a blanket reduction.
Personally I am not averse to the changes when implemented sensibly, but it does play into Rishi's new role as the poor motorist's friend. The 20 policy, like ULEZ, both of which the Conservatives claim to hate, despite having their fingerprints all over them play into Rishi's rather clever, if cynical and untrue narrative that Labour will repossess everyone's ICE cars on January 1, 2030. I think we would all laugh out loud if Drakeford delivered Rishi a magnificent and comprehensive victory at the next GE.
I would be amused, but I don't see a Conservative government in the UK or Wales reversing such a policy. They may try to weaponise the issue as a last throw of the dice for the next Election, but they won't want to be seen making our roads more dangerous, especially for pedestrians - even though they have do-nothing policies on road safety improvement.
We already have the data from extended periods of time that wider programmes of lower speed limits in residential areas significantly improve road safety. Take Hull, mentioned in the relevant ROSPA paper:
From 1994, there was a widespread introduction of 20mph zones in Hull, and by 2003, there were 120 zones covering 500 streets. The casualty statistics between 1994 and 2001 showed a drop of 14% in Hull, compared to a rise of 1.5% in the rest of Yorkshire and Humberside. In the 20mph zones in Hull, there was a decrease in total accidents of 56% and in fatal and serious injuries of 90%. The biggest reductions were pedestrian casualties, which fell by 54%, child casualties, which dropped by 54% and child pedestrian casualties, which fell by 74%. These figures were reported in Local Transport Today https://www.rospa.com/media/documents/road-safety/20mph-zones-and-speed-limits-factsheet.pdf
We already have a large number of Local Highways Authorities that have implemented 20mph limits quite widely.
Does anyone have examples of large scale reversal of such policies once implemented? .
Tower Hamlets, as run by Disgraced Once and Current Mayor Lutfur Rahman?
The Lutfur Rahman found guilty of corrupt and illegal practices?
Yes - he served his five year ban and started a new political party.
Rahman is a poster boy of the Corbynist left; the response to his removal from office is remarkably similar to the hardcore Trumpers with their boy; it's all an establishment witch hunt etc.
If Labour can frame green issues in a more local/tangible way I reckon they’ll be onto a winner.
It’s hard to see a global increase of 0.3°; it is much easier to see your rivers being filled with sewage and your beaches covered in dead sealife.
My pet theory is that most people really do care about environmental issues, but are turned off by global intangibles. Labour’s job is to frame the argument correctly.
Most people do care, but they don’t want to wear hair shirts.
I had to rebut an "idea" of a vegetarian only main course at an industry dinner on Monday, I'm a member of the planning committee.
I said it would risk patronising and alienating people, and many wouldn't come again.
Is the problem that it would be telegraphed in an earnest, virtue-signally way?
I mean, if it was an informal occasion and the food was, say, pizza and salad with no patronising bollux attached you wouldn't mind would you?
There's that too.
This stuff really yanks people's chain, but they complain in private (and vote with their feet) lest they come across as a denier or uncommitted.
It is very unpopular.
Yeah we had something similar at work, a poor idea just moving through the committees with no one objecting but as soon as someone did a few other people felt like they could speak up and then suddenly management realised just how unpopular their idea was so they reversed it.
Yes not uncommon. Like @Anabobazina I wouldn't mind a veggie main meal even though I am a meat eater. I would draw the line at vegan as that in my opinion would put people off and definitely question the motives of that being proposed so @Casino_Royale probably has a decent point for those who don't want a veggie meal forced upon them.
Went to a wedding with vegan only food (the bride and groom both vegan). I'm also an omnivore, but I must say that it was truly excellent. Whether meat, animal-derived or vegan matters much less than the quality of the ingredients and cooking. Agree that I'd struggle with full-time vegan diet, while I'd have no real problem with vegetarian - I'm very happy to eat good meat, raised well, but it wouldn't ruin my life to stop.
I do suspect CR is right in that some might be put off attending by an advertised vegetarian menu.
And some bad news for Wales.... Superstar Louis Rees Zammit has been banned from playing in Wales home games for the 2023-24 season. He was clocked at 24.6 mph during Wales recent win against Portugal, which exceeds the new Welsh speed restrictions. First Minister Mark Drakeford said 'This young mans reckless behaviour sets a terrible example for other players which endangers not just other players and officials but the 74,000 spectators inside the stadium'. As well as the ban, he will have to attend a Slow Speed School which has already been pioneered by Steve Borthwick.
I've been trying to get my head around this interactive map of the new speed limits, and I'm baffled.
The A493 from Tywyn to Dolgellau goes through a number of small villages. One of them is my old stamping ground of Llwyngwril.
If I read the map aright, they have kept the limit at 30 from Llangelynin to Llwyngwril, reduced it to 20 at Llwyngwril itself, *kept it at 20* from Llwyngwril to Friog, and *increased* it to 30 going through Friog itself.
If correct, that's madness.
And if not, the map can't be relied on.
But there, Drakeford couldn't even spell Llwyngwril.
There are quite a few anomalies, although that is the work of the individual council. The Vale Council have managed the transition very well. I was in Pembrokeshire earlier in the week and between Haverfordwest and Milford Haven the speed limit is 20 through Johnston which is insanely slow. Your post nonetheless puts pay to BigG's assertion than there is a blanket reduction.
Personally I am not averse to the changes when implemented sensibly, but it does play into Rishi's new role as the poor motorist's friend. The 20 policy, like ULEZ, both of which the Conservatives claim to hate, despite having their fingerprints all over them play into Rishi's rather clever, if cynical and untrue narrative that Labour will repossess everyone's ICE cars on January 1, 2030. I think we would all laugh out loud if Drakeford delivered Rishi a magnificent and comprehensive victory at the next GE.
I would be amused, but I don't see a Conservative government in the UK or Wales reversing such a policy. They may try to weaponise the issue as a last throw of the dice for the next Election, but they won't want to be seen making our roads more dangerous, especially for pedestrians - even though they have do-nothing policies on road safety improvement.
We already have the data from extended periods of time that wider programmes of lower speed limits in residential areas significantly improve road safety. Take Hull, mentioned in the relevant ROSPA paper:
From 1994, there was a widespread introduction of 20mph zones in Hull, and by 2003, there were 120 zones covering 500 streets. The casualty statistics between 1994 and 2001 showed a drop of 14% in Hull, compared to a rise of 1.5% in the rest of Yorkshire and Humberside. In the 20mph zones in Hull, there was a decrease in total accidents of 56% and in fatal and serious injuries of 90%. The biggest reductions were pedestrian casualties, which fell by 54%, child casualties, which dropped by 54% and child pedestrian casualties, which fell by 74%. These figures were reported in Local Transport Today https://www.rospa.com/media/documents/road-safety/20mph-zones-and-speed-limits-factsheet.pdf
We already have a large number of Local Highways Authorities that have implemented 20mph limits quite widely.
Does anyone have examples of large scale reversal of such policies once implemented? .
Tower Hamlets, as run by Disgraced Once and Current Mayor Lutfur Rahman?
The Lutfur Rahman found guilty of corrupt and illegal practices?
Yes, that's the one. But the question was about reversing LTNs.
Which is happening because Rahman is playing to his voters - the poorest groups in Tower Hamlets.
Part of his shtick is that they are being screwed over by the RICH EVUL residents. There is and additional, racist, subtext to that - the RICH EVUL residents are from Other Ethnic Groups.
I think the LDs are great value in Mid Beds but DYOR.
Why are you so convinced the LDs will win it?
If someone offers me 3-1 odds on the LDs, then I'd probably take it. I'd reckon they are probably neck and neck with Labour to grab the seat, simply because they are better byelection players, and they have some momentum.
My guesstimate would be 40% (chance) Labour, 40% LD, 20% Con.
That makes this an "OK" (rather than great) bet, but I'm far from certain the LDs will win.
I'm not sure where this idea the LDs have momentum is coming from.
Sure, they were working the seat for months. But then Labour turned up and outgunned them and now the polling shows it's a two-horse race between them and the Conservatives.
My bet is that they are now out the picture for the same reason they are at a national level.
But turnout is likely to be only about 40% - The effort on getting to the postal voters is crucial and thanks to Nadine's delayed resignation the Lib Dems are established. From my visits it is seen as local fight "we are not electing a government" was mentioned a few times.
As our person on the spot what is your feeling as to how it is going ?
Not on the spot - only a visitor - hope to go back on Sunday - Whilst local polls are very suspect -partly because of turnout- it may be equally fatal to rely on my biased anecdote!!
I reported the view of a LD PPC from a target seat that visited last weekend. I will repeat:
Independent thinks he is going to win. Nobody else does Nobody appears to want to vote Tory (we have heard that before and lots do) None of the soft Tories want to vote Labour but are now confused as to who to vote for. Labour have consolidated their existing vote who aren't tactically switching LD have a huge opportunity with soft Tories, but need to convince them that is who they have to vote for.
It could go anyway, but the biggest opportunity was for the LDs. Labour or Tories could win on a 3 way split.
Cash? I drove to Glasgow and back yesterday for a business meeting. Forgot my wallet. Happily navigated around, paid for items, even got signed into Costco just using my phone.
Liberating...
Try using your wallet as a satnav when you forget your phone!
Try using your phone as anything when it runs out of battery!
This is, largely, a cultural argument between neophiles and luddites. I am absolutely fine for the Neophiles to use their phone for everything, but for me technology was absolutely fine in 2005 and almost nothing (for the end user like me) has come along since which offers significant enough advantages for me to put in the minimal effort of learning how to use it.
Satnavs are a perfect example. As a culture, we managed perfectly well without them before 2005; now people are dependent on them.
If Labour can frame green issues in a more local/tangible way I reckon they’ll be onto a winner.
It’s hard to see a global increase of 0.3°; it is much easier to see your rivers being filled with sewage and your beaches covered in dead sealife.
My pet theory is that most people really do care about environmental issues, but are turned off by global intangibles. Labour’s job is to frame the argument correctly.
Most people do care, but they don’t want to wear hair shirts.
I had to rebut an "idea" of a vegetarian only main course at an industry dinner on Monday, I'm a member of the planning committee.
I said it would risk patronising and alienating people, and many wouldn't come again.
Is the problem that it would be telegraphed in an earnest, virtue-signally way?
I mean, if it was an informal occasion and the food was, say, pizza and salad with no patronising bollux attached you wouldn't mind would you?
There's that too.
This stuff really yanks people's chain, but they complain in private (and vote with their feet) lest they come across as a denier or uncommitted.
It is very unpopular.
Yeah we had something similar at work, a poor idea just moving through the committees with no one objecting but as soon as someone did a few other people felt like they could speak up and then suddenly management realised just how unpopular their idea was so they reversed it.
Yes not uncommon. Like @Anabobazina I wouldn't mind a veggie main meal even though I am a meat eater. I would draw the line at vegan as that in my opinion would put people off and definitely question the motives of that being proposed so @Casino_Royale probably has a decent point for those who don't want a veggie meal forced upon them.
Went to a wedding with vegan only food (the bride and groom both vegan). I'm also an omnivore, but I must say that it was truly excellent. Whether meat, animal-derived or vegan matters much less than the quality of the ingredients and cooking. Agree that I'd struggle with full-time vegan diet, while I'd have no real problem with vegetarian - I'm very happy to eat good meat, raised well, but it wouldn't ruin my life to stop.
I do suspect CR is right in that some might be put off attending by an advertised vegetarian menu.
You haven’t lived if you haven’t been to an Indian wedding where the bride and groom turn up two hours late, the food is all vegetarian, and the bar is dry…
Several of us sneaked out quickly to another hotel two doors down, where we could get a burger and a beer.
Cash? I drove to Glasgow and back yesterday for a business meeting. Forgot my wallet. Happily navigated around, paid for items, even got signed into Costco just using my phone.
Liberating...
Yep.
Now just get rid of your wallet full stop.
I haven't carried one for years. They are entirely unnecessary, just a bulky burden that ruins the line of your suit trousers.
Cash? I drove to Glasgow and back yesterday for a business meeting. Forgot my wallet. Happily navigated around, paid for items, even got signed into Costco just using my phone.
Liberating...
Yep.
Now just get rid of your wallet full stop.
I haven't carried one for years. They are entirely unnecessary, just a bulky burden that ruins the line of your suit trousers.
You have more confidence in electronic systems than I do.
Cash? I drove to Glasgow and back yesterday for a business meeting. Forgot my wallet. Happily navigated around, paid for items, even got signed into Costco just using my phone.
Liberating...
Try using your wallet as a satnav when you forget your phone!
Try using your phone as anything when it runs out of battery!
This is, largely, a cultural argument between neophiles and luddites. I am absolutely fine for the Neophiles to use their phone for everything, but for me technology was absolutely fine in 2005 and almost nothing (for the end user like me) has come along since which offers significant enough advantages for me to put in the minimal effort of learning how to use it.
Satnavs are a perfect example. As a culture, we managed perfectly well without them before 2005; now people are dependent on them.
As discussed many times previously, get a smartwatch – it operates independently of your phone, which you always need anyway. So one backs up the other.
Do it. Life is better without lugging around stupid pieces of paper.
If Labour can frame green issues in a more local/tangible way I reckon they’ll be onto a winner.
It’s hard to see a global increase of 0.3°; it is much easier to see your rivers being filled with sewage and your beaches covered in dead sealife.
My pet theory is that most people really do care about environmental issues, but are turned off by global intangibles. Labour’s job is to frame the argument correctly.
Most people do care, but they don’t want to wear hair shirts.
I had to rebut an "idea" of a vegetarian only main course at an industry dinner on Monday, I'm a member of the planning committee.
I said it would risk patronising and alienating people, and many wouldn't come again.
Is the problem that it would be telegraphed in an earnest, virtue-signally way?
I mean, if it was an informal occasion and the food was, say, pizza and salad with no patronising bollux attached you wouldn't mind would you?
There's that too.
This stuff really yanks people's chain, but they complain in private (and vote with their feet) lest they come across as a denier or uncommitted.
It is very unpopular.
Yeah we had something similar at work, a poor idea just moving through the committees with no one objecting but as soon as someone did a few other people felt like they could speak up and then suddenly management realised just how unpopular their idea was so they reversed it.
Yes not uncommon. Like @Anabobazina I wouldn't mind a veggie main meal even though I am a meat eater. I would draw the line at vegan as that in my opinion would put people off and definitely question the motives of that being proposed so @Casino_Royale probably has a decent point for those who don't want a veggie meal forced upon them.
Went to a wedding with vegan only food (the bride and groom both vegan). I'm also an omnivore, but I must say that it was truly excellent. Whether meat, animal-derived or vegan matters much less than the quality of the ingredients and cooking. Agree that I'd struggle with full-time vegan diet, while I'd have no real problem with vegetarian - I'm very happy to eat good meat, raised well, but it wouldn't ruin my life to stop.
I do suspect CR is right in that some might be put off attending by an advertised vegetarian menu.
I too went to a vegan wedding – lots of very glamorous and slender ladies there but (apart from that) my main recollection was how pissed everyone got. Literally falling over drunk (almost everyone) on the dance floor. Vegan food can be delicious but it's not great for soaking up the booze!
I think he referred to Meat Tax plans which apparentl exist out there somewhere, amongst things he is going to stop that were not going to happen anyway - but did not link it to Labour. Have we all seen the graphic?
He says "we're stopping" measures like "taxes on eating meat" and "compulsory car sharing". The implication ios clearly that unless the Government took action, these measures were going to come in (one could even read it as meaning that the Government planned to introduce them). This is such nonsense that it's boring to even refute it. Something suggested by the odd think-tank or green politician is not "a measure that needs stopping". And actually I'm unaware of a single institute or politician anywhere on the planet who has proposed "compulsory car-sharing". It's just a preposterous pyramid of piffle, as Boris might say.
"one could even read it as meaning that the Government planned to introduce them". Yes, that's one of the most puzzling aspects of this - the natural reading of "we're stopping" is surely "we were either doing this or going to do this, but now we're going to stop".
So the Tories are saying they were going to be bringing in a meat tax, but now won't. Fine. But what's to stop them changing their mind again?
Cash? I drove to Glasgow and back yesterday for a business meeting. Forgot my wallet. Happily navigated around, paid for items, even got signed into Costco just using my phone.
Liberating...
Unless the electronic systems break down for some reason.
The only issue I have had in ten years with electronic monetary systems was when the only ATM in the resort I was staying at in SE Europe this year broke down. Thus, no cash, in a place where many businesses are still – ludicrously – cash only. It was a total and utter pain the arse.
The idea that cash doesn't require electronic systems is utter nonsense. How do you withdraw it?
Cash? I drove to Glasgow and back yesterday for a business meeting. Forgot my wallet. Happily navigated around, paid for items, even got signed into Costco just using my phone.
Liberating...
Yep.
Now just get rid of your wallet full stop.
I haven't carried one for years. They are entirely unnecessary, just a bulky burden that ruins the line of your suit trousers.
You have more confidence in electronic systems than I do.
Ten years of being cash free and never having a problem does that to a man.
Further down in the article, police nab other road users too.
One of the first things one notices when visiting London is how a lot of cyclists jump red lights, which they don't in most of the rest of the country. How and when did that become a common thing to do?
If Labour can frame green issues in a more local/tangible way I reckon they’ll be onto a winner.
It’s hard to see a global increase of 0.3°; it is much easier to see your rivers being filled with sewage and your beaches covered in dead sealife.
My pet theory is that most people really do care about environmental issues, but are turned off by global intangibles. Labour’s job is to frame the argument correctly.
Most people do care, but they don’t want to wear hair shirts.
I had to rebut an "idea" of a vegetarian only main course at an industry dinner on Monday, I'm a member of the planning committee.
I said it would risk patronising and alienating people, and many wouldn't come again.
Is the problem that it would be telegraphed in an earnest, virtue-signally way?
I mean, if it was an informal occasion and the food was, say, pizza and salad with no patronising bollux attached you wouldn't mind would you?
There's that too.
This stuff really yanks people's chain, but they complain in private (and vote with their feet) lest they come across as a denier or uncommitted.
It is very unpopular.
Yeah we had something similar at work, a poor idea just moving through the committees with no one objecting but as soon as someone did a few other people felt like they could speak up and then suddenly management realised just how unpopular their idea was so they reversed it.
Yes not uncommon. Like @Anabobazina I wouldn't mind a veggie main meal even though I am a meat eater. I would draw the line at vegan as that in my opinion would put people off and definitely question the motives of that being proposed so @Casino_Royale probably has a decent point for those who don't want a veggie meal forced upon them.
Went to a wedding with vegan only food (the bride and groom both vegan). I'm also an omnivore, but I must say that it was truly excellent. Whether meat, animal-derived or vegan matters much less than the quality of the ingredients and cooking. Agree that I'd struggle with full-time vegan diet, while I'd have no real problem with vegetarian - I'm very happy to eat good meat, raised well, but it wouldn't ruin my life to stop.
I do suspect CR is right in that some might be put off attending by an advertised vegetarian menu.
You haven’t lived if you haven’t been to an Indian wedding where the bride and groom turn up two hours late, the food is all vegetarian, and the bar is dry…
Several of us sneaked out quickly to another hotel two doors down, where we could get a burger and a beer.
You missed out, if the weddings I've been to are any guide
(I've only been to one dry wedding; that did feel a bit different!)
Further down in the article, police nab other road users too.
Not a bad idea tbh although Bank junction is a funny one because they have recently banned cars so it's only buses and bikes and there are several exits so each exit you end up waiting for ages for "your" light to go green. I can well see why people jump the lights, although I am the idiot cyclist that stops at all red lights so there is a vicarious pleasure when I very rarely see someone being had up for it, usually because while going through a red light they have cut up a police car (seen a couple of weeks ago up the road at Cannon Street.
Cash? I drove to Glasgow and back yesterday for a business meeting. Forgot my wallet. Happily navigated around, paid for items, even got signed into Costco just using my phone.
Liberating...
Try using your wallet as a satnav when you forget your phone!
Try using your phone as anything when it runs out of battery!
This is, largely, a cultural argument between neophiles and luddites. I am absolutely fine for the Neophiles to use their phone for everything, but for me technology was absolutely fine in 2005 and almost nothing (for the end user like me) has come along since which offers significant enough advantages for me to put in the minimal effort of learning how to use it.
Satnavs are a perfect example. As a culture, we managed perfectly well without them before 2005; now people are dependent on them.
Mrs C came in the other day - anxious because there was a spate of water coming from one of the drains next to a local water main. Out in the countryside, so I looked up the NGR. Scottish Water telephonist doesn't have a clue what it is - wants the postcode ... eventually we manage to pass on a verbal description to tell the engineer where it is ...
Oh and on the seven bins thing this is smart by Sunak because in many peoples' minds the feeling is "they're coming for my turkey twizzlers and are going to tax me for watching Netflix unless I offset the carbon used in so doing".
So this tells those people that the government is "on their side" and if the Hampstead champagne socialists want to forego one of their holidays - their flight to Costa Rica, perhaps, or pay a huge and voluntary amount of tax on a trip to Spain, then that's fine by them.
If Labour can frame green issues in a more local/tangible way I reckon they’ll be onto a winner.
It’s hard to see a global increase of 0.3°; it is much easier to see your rivers being filled with sewage and your beaches covered in dead sealife.
My pet theory is that most people really do care about environmental issues, but are turned off by global intangibles. Labour’s job is to frame the argument correctly.
Most people do care, but they don’t want to wear hair shirts.
I had to rebut an "idea" of a vegetarian only main course at an industry dinner on Monday, I'm a member of the planning committee.
I said it would risk patronising and alienating people, and many wouldn't come again.
Is the problem that it would be telegraphed in an earnest, virtue-signally way?
I mean, if it was an informal occasion and the food was, say, pizza and salad with no patronising bollux attached you wouldn't mind would you?
There's that too.
This stuff really yanks people's chain, but they complain in private (and vote with their feet) lest they come across as a denier or uncommitted.
It is very unpopular.
Yeah we had something similar at work, a poor idea just moving through the committees with no one objecting but as soon as someone did a few other people felt like they could speak up and then suddenly management realised just how unpopular their idea was so they reversed it.
Yes not uncommon. Like @Anabobazina I wouldn't mind a veggie main meal even though I am a meat eater. I would draw the line at vegan as that in my opinion would put people off and definitely question the motives of that being proposed so @Casino_Royale probably has a decent point for those who don't want a veggie meal forced upon them.
Went to a wedding with vegan only food (the bride and groom both vegan). I'm also an omnivore, but I must say that it was truly excellent. Whether meat, animal-derived or vegan matters much less than the quality of the ingredients and cooking. Agree that I'd struggle with full-time vegan diet, while I'd have no real problem with vegetarian - I'm very happy to eat good meat, raised well, but it wouldn't ruin my life to stop.
I do suspect CR is right in that some might be put off attending by an advertised vegetarian menu.
I have a niece who is a vegan cook (professionally) and produces excellent meals and if it is your wedding then do what you like, but if it is a work event I wouldn't force it upon others.
A friend who is vegetarian went to a set meal in France and on telling them he was vegetarian was given a ham omelette!
Fortunately both my niece and friend (contrary to the stereotype) are very tolerant of us meat eaters.
Oh and on the seven bins thing this is smart by Sunak because in many peoples' minds the feeling is "they're coming for my turkey twizzlers" and are going to tax me for watching Netflix unless I offset the carbon used while I do so.
So this tells those people that the government is "on their side" and if the Hampstead champagne socialists want to forego one of their holidays - their flight to Costa Rica, perhaps, then that's fine by them.
Sunak is offering imaginary cures for imaginary diseases. The oldest political snake oil known.
Zac Goldsmith was critical of Sunak’s Net Zero policy change. Kemi Badenoch was quoted in the Standard criticising Goldsmith, saying, “Zac Goldsmith is someone who cares very much about the environment,... But the fact is, he has way more money than pretty much everyone in the UK.”
That’s a brave line to take when Rishi Sunak has way more money than Zac Goldsmith!
The theory of “luxury beliefs” is going to be an increasingly important political issue in the next few years.
It starts with mocking those who turn up to climate change summits in private planes, but quickly goes into retail local politics, with Conservatives pointing at Sadiq Khan and Mark Drakeford as evidence that Labour want to make cars something that only the rich have, and everyone else can get the bus.
Same with the ‘meat tax’. Fillet steak and caviar for the climate summit attendees, but bugs and salad for the rest of us.
Sure. If you want to hate your enemies out of fear of the unknown, nobody can stop you. It is an update of the paranoid theories that Jewish monied elites control everything and kill Christian babies.
Oh, the “It’s not really happening, it’s a mad conspiracy theory” argument.
It’s really happening, in the real world.
Please show us your "real world" evidence for Labour's 'meat tax' plans, which Sunak recently referred to ?
The real world seems to be that our PM has engaged in a dishonest smear campaign, which he kicked off just as Parliament went into recess. Neatly avoiding Parliamentary scrutiny of his shoddy policy changes.
Did Sunak specifically refer to Labour’s meat tax plans? I might have missed that.
Labour’s taxes and restrictions on motorists, on the other hand, are very clear for everyone to see in London and Wales.
If he's not talking about Labour's plans, then WTF is he burbling on about ?
Nobody has a clue. Thats why it is being widely and viciously lampooned.
Remember folks - Rishi Sunak is the Prime Minister. If he is defending citizens against these dastardly plans and they actually existed, then they are plans of the government which he is the leader of.
So he is defending us against himself. Is he bipolar?
We do have a clue - he told us where he got it from, and he made it up.
I think it was the interview with Nick Robinson, but he quoted the Climate Change Committee suggesting we should consider cutting back on meat. They've said they never suggested taxes.
The "compulsory" car share one was the same - he put two and two together, got five, and then said five was a "euphemism" for six.
FPT - The Spectator is right: voters don't want legal routes and humanitarian corridors: they want a naval blockade backed with force. They don't care about international law and, to the extent they do, if that's a problem they expect politicians to change it.
If politicians in Europe continue to fail to deliver on this then I don't see any limit to how voters will go, sadly.
IIUC there are about 50 boats arriving per night across the Channel. A naval blockade to stop them would require things like helicopters or fast boats to disable the engines until a a RN ship can arrive to process them, however we define "process". So we need to buy/build/redeploy enough choppers/fast boats/slow ships to do it.
One of my ongoing complaints about British politics is its lack of realism: what is necessary to achieve the task and deploying the resources necessary to achieve it. Do you see any - and I mean any - party doing the necessary planning for a naval blockade?
No, the number of boats arriving is zero to 5 per day according to official figures:
Fair point, although I do point out that your data set covers one week and the provisional set[1] since Jan 2023 shows a max of 15 boats (02/09/2023). I haven't looked at the finalised data[2] yet.
But my point still holds. Whether it's five, fifteen or fifty they will be fast enough to evade a frigate, so we need things capable of immobilising that many ships in the dark and rain. Is anybody actually buying/building/redeploying things to do that? No? Then they're just arsing around. Because that's what politicians do: talk hard and do bugger-all
And some bad news for Wales.... Superstar Louis Rees Zammit has been banned from playing in Wales home games for the 2023-24 season. He was clocked at 24.6 mph during Wales recent win against Portugal, which exceeds the new Welsh speed restrictions. First Minister Mark Drakeford said 'This young mans reckless behaviour sets a terrible example for other players which endangers not just other players and officials but the 74,000 spectators inside the stadium'. As well as the ban, he will have to attend a Slow Speed School which has already been pioneered by Steve Borthwick.
I've been trying to get my head around this interactive map of the new speed limits, and I'm baffled.
The A493 from Tywyn to Dolgellau goes through a number of small villages. One of them is my old stamping ground of Llwyngwril.
If I read the map aright, they have kept the limit at 30 from Llangelynin to Llwyngwril, reduced it to 20 at Llwyngwril itself, *kept it at 20* from Llwyngwril to Friog, and *increased* it to 30 going through Friog itself.
If correct, that's madness.
And if not, the map can't be relied on.
But there, Drakeford couldn't even spell Llwyngwril.
There are quite a few anomalies, although that is the work of the individual council. The Vale Council have managed the transition very well. I was in Pembrokeshire earlier in the week and between Haverfordwest and Milford Haven the speed limit is 20 through Johnston which is insanely slow. Your post nonetheless puts pay to BigG's assertion than there is a blanket reduction.
Personally I am not averse to the changes when implemented sensibly, but it does play into Rishi's new role as the poor motorist's friend. The 20 policy, like ULEZ, both of which the Conservatives claim to hate, despite having their fingerprints all over them play into Rishi's rather clever, if cynical and untrue narrative that Labour will repossess everyone's ICE cars on January 1, 2030. I think we would all laugh out loud if Drakeford delivered Rishi a magnificent and comprehensive victory at the next GE.
Can I ask you a genuine question as one of only a few Welsh posters on this forum
Do you agree the implementation has been terrible and generated a lot of genuine anger, and that the Senedd petitions committee will report factually on the petition, it will be subject to a Senedd debate, and that whilst the 20mph rule remain, many of the present changes will be reviewed and sensible changes made ?
On the whole in the Vale there has clearly been a lot of thought gone into the roll out. There has been chaos elsewhere. Carmarthenshire council installed 20s a few weeks ago and removed the black cellophane so we had twenty and thirty signs together.
There is a great deal of animosity, not least because of political opportunism. The petition, I am fairly sure has partially been hijacked by political opponents of Labour. Do you not agree that RT Davies has been disingenuous with his u-turned opposition to the scheme? I am busy exchanging photos of gear knobs with 1, 2 and R only displayed, and the Louis Rees Zammit speed ban. They are rather funny, but I don't oppose the scheme in principle, and of course any teething problems should be rectified as soon as possible.
Andrew Davies and the Conservatives in the Senedd are now diametrically opposed and would return all 20s to 30s, which of course would mean an additional dead child or two each year. Do you agree with that approach?
No - I do not agree with RT Davies or the conservatives on this
I like to think that I am moderate in my views, and certainly 20mph zones have their place and indeed have been in various locations, especially schools, for a long time
The issues is that some of the reductions need to be revisited and a sensible compromise arrived at
Go safe has deemed 26mph will be the point of prosecution, and this morning I did detect an increase in speed towards this rather than previously when many drivers stuck to 20mph
Additionally there are many roads that simply will not be speed controlled where I expect 25 - 30mph to happen
I do not expect this to have any influence on the next GE, but I do detect an increase in support for the conservatives in the Senedd but whether that continues only time will tell
As in all things, there are extreme views on both sides but sensible compromise is the way to make this work in everyone interests
That sounds sensible, @Big_G_NorthWales. Some will be revisited, and there is provision for that.
The position being taken by Howard Cox is now "20mph zones outside schools" and even Susan Hall is "20mph limits in residential areas". They have started to move.
But if we say 20mh outside schools 'for the children', what about parks and nurseries, estates where kids play and so on? And then pedestrian crossings where a vehicle racing through on the outside lane (or the wrong side of the road) risks a pedestrian unseen behind a vehicle stopped in the nearside lane at eg a Zebra? Those are equally strong cases for applying rather more control to the behaviour of people driving around at inappropriate speed.
The logic leads to default 20mph in urban areas, with limited exceptions - perhaps where pedestrian crossings need to be signal-controlled and separated mobility infrastructure provided.
I think we will get to such a position eventually.
Further down in the article, police nab other road users too.
One of the first things one notices when visiting London is how a lot of cyclists jump red lights, which they don't in most of the rest of the country. How and when did that become a common thing to do?
The vast majority of cyclists jump red lights it is just part of London, unfortunately.
Oh and on the seven bins thing this is smart by Sunak because in many peoples' minds the feeling is "they're coming for my turkey twizzlers and are going to tax me for watching Netflix unless I offset the carbon used in so doing".
So this tells those people that the government is "on their side" and if the Hampstead champagne socialists want to forego one of their holidays - their flight to Costa Rica, perhaps, or pay a huge and voluntary amount of tax on a trip to Spain, then that's fine by them.
"Hampstead champagne socialists"
Your right, let's not restrict them geographically. *Anywhere* champagne socialists.
What a great innovation! I might get this. The worst thing about Monopoly was the interminable faffing around with stupid slips of paper – and your scurrilous cousin stealing from you when your back was turned. Great to see that Hasbro has seen the light!
I really dislike Monopoly, cash or no cash. It's just not a particularly fun (or well-designed) game. The only good thing about it is the little metal playing pieces.
As a commercial brand and format though, chapeau. It's a money-hoovering behemoth.
And some bad news for Wales.... Superstar Louis Rees Zammit has been banned from playing in Wales home games for the 2023-24 season. He was clocked at 24.6 mph during Wales recent win against Portugal, which exceeds the new Welsh speed restrictions. First Minister Mark Drakeford said 'This young mans reckless behaviour sets a terrible example for other players which endangers not just other players and officials but the 74,000 spectators inside the stadium'. As well as the ban, he will have to attend a Slow Speed School which has already been pioneered by Steve Borthwick.
I've been trying to get my head around this interactive map of the new speed limits, and I'm baffled.
The A493 from Tywyn to Dolgellau goes through a number of small villages. One of them is my old stamping ground of Llwyngwril.
If I read the map aright, they have kept the limit at 30 from Llangelynin to Llwyngwril, reduced it to 20 at Llwyngwril itself, *kept it at 20* from Llwyngwril to Friog, and *increased* it to 30 going through Friog itself.
If correct, that's madness.
And if not, the map can't be relied on.
But there, Drakeford couldn't even spell Llwyngwril.
There are quite a few anomalies, although that is the work of the individual council. The Vale Council have managed the transition very well. I was in Pembrokeshire earlier in the week and between Haverfordwest and Milford Haven the speed limit is 20 through Johnston which is insanely slow. Your post nonetheless puts pay to BigG's assertion than there is a blanket reduction.
Personally I am not averse to the changes when implemented sensibly, but it does play into Rishi's new role as the poor motorist's friend. The 20 policy, like ULEZ, both of which the Conservatives claim to hate, despite having their fingerprints all over them play into Rishi's rather clever, if cynical and untrue narrative that Labour will repossess everyone's ICE cars on January 1, 2030. I think we would all laugh out loud if Drakeford delivered Rishi a magnificent and comprehensive victory at the next GE.
Can I ask you a genuine question as one of only a few Welsh posters on this forum
Do you agree the implementation has been terrible and generated a lot of genuine anger, and that the Senedd petitions committee will report factually on the petition, it will be subject to a Senedd debate, and that whilst the 20mph rule remain, many of the present changes will be reviewed and sensible changes made ?
On the whole in the Vale there has clearly been a lot of thought gone into the roll out. There has been chaos elsewhere. Carmarthenshire council installed 20s a few weeks ago and removed the black cellophane so we had twenty and thirty signs together.
There is a great deal of animosity, not least because of political opportunism. The petition, I am fairly sure has partially been hijacked by political opponents of Labour. Do you not agree that RT Davies has been disingenuous with his u-turned opposition to the scheme? I am busy exchanging photos of gear knobs with 1, 2 and R only displayed, and the Louis Rees Zammit speed ban. They are rather funny, but I don't oppose the scheme in principle, and of course any teething problems should be rectified as soon as possible.
Andrew Davies and the Conservatives in the Senedd are now diametrically opposed and would return all 20s to 30s, which of course would mean an additional dead child or two each year. Do you agree with that approach?
No - I do not agree with RT Davies or the conservatives on this
I like to think that I am moderate in my views, and certainly 20mph zones have their place and indeed have been in various locations, especially schools, for a long time
The issues is that some of the reductions need to be revisited and a sensible compromise arrived at
Go safe has deemed 26mph will be the point of prosecution, and this morning I did detect an increase in speed towards this rather than previously when many drivers stuck to 20mph
Additionally there are many roads that simply will not be speed controlled where I expect 25 - 30mph to happen
I do not expect this to have any influence on the next GE, but I do detect an increase in support for the conservatives in the Senedd but whether that continues only time will tell
As in all things, there are extreme views on both sides but sensible compromise is the way to make this work in everyone interests
That sounds sensible, @Big_G_NorthWales. Some will be revisited, and there is provision for that.
The position being taken by Howard Cox is now "20mph zones outside schools" and even Susan Hall is "20mph limits in residential areas". They have started to move.
But if we say 20mh outside schools 'for the children', what about parks and nurseries, estates where kids play and so on? And then pedestrian crossings where a vehicle racing through on the outside lane (or the wrong side of the road) risks a pedestrian unseen behind a vehicle stopped in the nearside lane at eg a Zebra? Those are equally strong cases.
The logic leads to default 20mph in urban areas, with limited exceptions - perhaps where pedestrian crossings need to be signal-controlled and separated mobility infrastructure provided.
I think everyone will get to such a position eventually.
Actually we are converging and a bit of common sense all round is the way forward
And some bad news for Wales.... Superstar Louis Rees Zammit has been banned from playing in Wales home games for the 2023-24 season. He was clocked at 24.6 mph during Wales recent win against Portugal, which exceeds the new Welsh speed restrictions. First Minister Mark Drakeford said 'This young mans reckless behaviour sets a terrible example for other players which endangers not just other players and officials but the 74,000 spectators inside the stadium'. As well as the ban, he will have to attend a Slow Speed School which has already been pioneered by Steve Borthwick.
I've been trying to get my head around this interactive map of the new speed limits, and I'm baffled.
The A493 from Tywyn to Dolgellau goes through a number of small villages. One of them is my old stamping ground of Llwyngwril.
If I read the map aright, they have kept the limit at 30 from Llangelynin to Llwyngwril, reduced it to 20 at Llwyngwril itself, *kept it at 20* from Llwyngwril to Friog, and *increased* it to 30 going through Friog itself.
If correct, that's madness.
And if not, the map can't be relied on.
But there, Drakeford couldn't even spell Llwyngwril.
There are quite a few anomalies, although that is the work of the individual council. The Vale Council have managed the transition very well. I was in Pembrokeshire earlier in the week and between Haverfordwest and Milford Haven the speed limit is 20 through Johnston which is insanely slow. Your post nonetheless puts pay to BigG's assertion than there is a blanket reduction.
Personally I am not averse to the changes when implemented sensibly, but it does play into Rishi's new role as the poor motorist's friend. The 20 policy, like ULEZ, both of which the Conservatives claim to hate, despite having their fingerprints all over them play into Rishi's rather clever, if cynical and untrue narrative that Labour will repossess everyone's ICE cars on January 1, 2030. I think we would all laugh out loud if Drakeford delivered Rishi a magnificent and comprehensive victory at the next GE.
Can I ask you a genuine question as one of only a few Welsh posters on this forum
Do you agree the implementation has been terrible and generated a lot of genuine anger, and that the Senedd petitions committee will report factually on the petition, it will be subject to a Senedd debate, and that whilst the 20mph rule remain, many of the present changes will be reviewed and sensible changes made ?
On the whole in the Vale there has clearly been a lot of thought gone into the roll out. There has been chaos elsewhere. Carmarthenshire council installed 20s a few weeks ago and removed the black cellophane so we had twenty and thirty signs together.
There is a great deal of animosity, not least because of political opportunism. The petition, I am fairly sure has partially been hijacked by political opponents of Labour. Do you not agree that RT Davies has been disingenuous with his u-turned opposition to the scheme? I am busy exchanging photos of gear knobs with 1, 2 and R only displayed, and the Louis Rees Zammit speed ban. They are rather funny, but I don't oppose the scheme in principle, and of course any teething problems should be rectified as soon as possible.
Andrew Davies and the Conservatives in the Senedd are now diametrically opposed and would return all 20s to 30s, which of course would mean an additional dead child or two each year. Do you agree with that approach?
No - I do not agree with RT Davies or the conservatives on this
I like to think that I am moderate in my views, and certainly 20mph zones have their place and indeed have been in various locations, especially schools, for a long time
The issues is that some of the reductions need to be revisited and a sensible compromise arrived at
Go safe has deemed 26mph will be the point of prosecution, and this morning I did detect an increase in speed towards this rather than previously when many drivers stuck to 20mph
Additionally there are many roads that simply will not be speed controlled where I expect 25 - 30mph to happen
I do not expect this to have any influence on the next GE, but I do detect an increase in support for the conservatives in the Senedd but whether that continues only time will tell
As in all things, there are extreme views on both sides but sensible compromise is the way to make this work in everyone interests
That sounds sensible, @Big_G_NorthWales. Some will be revisited, and there is provision for that.
The position being taken by Howard Cox is now "20mph zones outside schools" and even Susan Hall is "20mph limits in residential areas". They have started to move.
But if we say 20mh outside schools 'for the children', what about parks and nurseries, estates where kids play and so on? And then pedestrian crossings where a vehicle racing through on the outside lane (or the wrong side of the road) risks a pedestrian unseen behind a vehicle stopped in the nearside lane at eg a Zebra? Those are equally strong cases.
The logic leads to default 20mph in urban areas, with limited exceptions - perhaps where pedestrian crossings need to be signal-controlled and separated mobility infrastructure provided.
I think everyone will get to such a position eventually.
Cash? I drove to Glasgow and back yesterday for a business meeting. Forgot my wallet. Happily navigated around, paid for items, even got signed into Costco just using my phone.
Liberating...
Try using your wallet as a satnav when you forget your phone!
Try using your phone as anything when it runs out of battery!
This is, largely, a cultural argument between neophiles and luddites. I am absolutely fine for the Neophiles to use their phone for everything, but for me technology was absolutely fine in 2005 and almost nothing (for the end user like me) has come along since which offers significant enough advantages for me to put in the minimal effort of learning how to use it.
Satnavs are a perfect example. As a culture, we managed perfectly well without them before 2005; now people are dependent on them.
I simply could not have driven across S Korea without satnav. Would have needed a two week driving course without it. It's not just the navigation - the prompts about road signs and traffic rules are invaluable.
If Labour can frame green issues in a more local/tangible way I reckon they’ll be onto a winner.
It’s hard to see a global increase of 0.3°; it is much easier to see your rivers being filled with sewage and your beaches covered in dead sealife.
My pet theory is that most people really do care about environmental issues, but are turned off by global intangibles. Labour’s job is to frame the argument correctly.
Most people do care, but they don’t want to wear hair shirts.
I had to rebut an "idea" of a vegetarian only main course at an industry dinner on Monday, I'm a member of the planning committee.
I said it would risk patronising and alienating people, and many wouldn't come again.
Is the problem that it would be telegraphed in an earnest, virtue-signally way?
I mean, if it was an informal occasion and the food was, say, pizza and salad with no patronising bollux attached you wouldn't mind would you?
There's that too.
This stuff really yanks people's chain, but they complain in private (and vote with their feet) lest they come across as a denier or uncommitted.
It is very unpopular.
Yeah we had something similar at work, a poor idea just moving through the committees with no one objecting but as soon as someone did a few other people felt like they could speak up and then suddenly management realised just how unpopular their idea was so they reversed it.
Yes not uncommon. Like @Anabobazina I wouldn't mind a veggie main meal even though I am a meat eater. I would draw the line at vegan as that in my opinion would put people off and definitely question the motives of that being proposed so @Casino_Royale probably has a decent point for those who don't want a veggie meal forced upon them.
Went to a wedding with vegan only food (the bride and groom both vegan). I'm also an omnivore, but I must say that it was truly excellent. Whether meat, animal-derived or vegan matters much less than the quality of the ingredients and cooking. Agree that I'd struggle with full-time vegan diet, while I'd have no real problem with vegetarian - I'm very happy to eat good meat, raised well, but it wouldn't ruin my life to stop.
I do suspect CR is right in that some might be put off attending by an advertised vegetarian menu.
You haven’t lived if you haven’t been to an Indian wedding where the bride and groom turn up two hours late, the food is all vegetarian, and the bar is dry…
Several of us sneaked out quickly to another hotel two doors down, where we could get a burger and a beer.
I went to one such. Thankfully, a lot of younger guests had sneaked in bottles of champagne, which they mixed with the orange juice.
Oh and on the seven bins thing this is smart by Sunak because in many peoples' minds the feeling is "they're coming for my turkey twizzlers" and are going to tax me for watching Netflix unless I offset the carbon used while I do so.
So this tells those people that the government is "on their side" and if the Hampstead champagne socialists want to forego one of their holidays - their flight to Costa Rica, perhaps, then that's fine by them.
Sunak is offering imaginary cures for imaginary diseases. The oldest political snake oil known.
It is creating mood music and will be well-understood by its target audience.
See: £350m spent on the NHS.
The more people say well meat tax was never a thing the more the govt can keep that issue in peoples' minds because there sure are going to be a lot of green taxes, ULEZ being a prime example.
Cash? I drove to Glasgow and back yesterday for a business meeting. Forgot my wallet. Happily navigated around, paid for items, even got signed into Costco just using my phone.
Liberating...
Try using your wallet as a satnav when you forget your phone!
Try using your phone as anything when it runs out of battery!
This is, largely, a cultural argument between neophiles and luddites. I am absolutely fine for the Neophiles to use their phone for everything, but for me technology was absolutely fine in 2005 and almost nothing (for the end user like me) has come along since which offers significant enough advantages for me to put in the minimal effort of learning how to use it.
Satnavs are a perfect example. As a culture, we managed perfectly well without them before 2005; now people are dependent on them.
As discussed many times previously, get a smartwatch – it operates independently of your phone, which you always need anyway. So one backs up the other.
Do it. Life is better without lugging around stupid pieces of paper.
Look, I'm not criticising your decisions - which are clearly right for you - but they're just not for me. I don't want to be charging multiple devices. I don't want to be wearing something on my wrist which I'd worry might get broken or lost (or, to be honest, at all - my habit is to wear a £4 digital watch, when and if I remember. They rarely last more than three or four years, but if it gets lost or smashed or dropped in the sea, it's no big issue.) I don't want to be dependent on carrying a phone around. I don't want to be dependent on carrying my glasses around (to read my phone). I don't want to be dependent on the tech working, because it's a pain in the arse when in doesn't. Some pieces of paper in my wallet just don't have electronic equivalents (e.g. the loyalty card for my local butcher, my Chester zoo membership cards, etc.). I don't want to be stood at a checkout trying to work out how to sign in to my Tesco clubcard app. Carrying a wallet causes me no inconvenience and indeed a mild feeling of something not feeling right when I don't have it. And if I'm honest, no, I don't like the traceability of eveything being done electronically.
That said, I rarely now carry change, which I did four years ago. So maybe in ten years or so I may come around to your way of thinking. It just feels like a massive inconvenience.
Zac Goldsmith was critical of Sunak’s Net Zero policy change. Kemi Badenoch was quoted in the Standard criticising Goldsmith, saying, “Zac Goldsmith is someone who cares very much about the environment,... But the fact is, he has way more money than pretty much everyone in the UK.”
That’s a brave line to take when Rishi Sunak has way more money than Zac Goldsmith!
The theory of “luxury beliefs” is going to be an increasingly important political issue in the next few years.
It starts with mocking those who turn up to climate change summits in private planes, but quickly goes into retail local politics, with Conservatives pointing at Sadiq Khan and Mark Drakeford as evidence that Labour want to make cars something that only the rich have, and everyone else can get the bus.
Same with the ‘meat tax’. Fillet steak and caviar for the climate summit attendees, but bugs and salad for the rest of us.
Sure. If you want to hate your enemies out of fear of the unknown, nobody can stop you. It is an update of the paranoid theories that Jewish monied elites control everything and kill Christian babies.
Oh, the “It’s not really happening, it’s a mad conspiracy theory” argument.
It’s really happening, in the real world.
Please show us your "real world" evidence for Labour's 'meat tax' plans, which Sunak recently referred to ?
The real world seems to be that our PM has engaged in a dishonest smear campaign, which he kicked off just as Parliament went into recess. Neatly avoiding Parliamentary scrutiny of his shoddy policy changes.
Did Sunak specifically refer to Labour’s meat tax plans? I might have missed that.
Labour’s taxes and restrictions on motorists, on the other hand, are very clear for everyone to see in London and Wales.
If he's not talking about Labour's plans, then WTF is he burbling on about ?
Nobody has a clue. Thats why it is being widely and viciously lampooned.
Remember folks - Rishi Sunak is the Prime Minister. If he is defending citizens against these dastardly plans and they actually existed, then they are plans of the government which he is the leader of.
So he is defending us against himself. Is he bipolar?
We do have a clue - he told us where he got it from, and he made it up.
I think it was the interview with Nick Robinson, but he quoted the Climate Change Committee suggesting we should consider cutting back on meat. They've said they never suggested taxes.
The "compulsory" car share one was the same - he put two and two together, got five, and then said five was a "euphemism" for six.
Oh and on the seven bins thing this is smart by Sunak because in many peoples' minds the feeling is "they're coming for my turkey twizzlers and are going to tax me for watching Netflix unless I offset the carbon used in so doing".
So this tells those people that the government is "on their side" and if the Hampstead champagne socialists want to forego one of their holidays - their flight to Costa Rica, perhaps, or pay a huge and voluntary amount of tax on a trip to Spain, then that's fine by them.
"Hampstead champagne socialists"
Your right, let's not restrict them geographically. *Anywhere* champagne socialists.
Oh and on the seven bins thing this is smart by Sunak because in many peoples' minds the feeling is "they're coming for my turkey twizzlers" and are going to tax me for watching Netflix unless I offset the carbon used while I do so.
So this tells those people that the government is "on their side" and if the Hampstead champagne socialists want to forego one of their holidays - their flight to Costa Rica, perhaps, then that's fine by them.
Sunak is offering imaginary cures for imaginary diseases. The oldest political snake oil known.
It is creating mood music and will be well-understood by its target audience.
See: £350m spent on the NHS.
The more people say well meat tax was never a thing the more the govt can keep that issue in peoples' minds because there sure are going to be a lot of green taxes, ULEZ being a prime example.
The more people say you are a liar the more people will keep that issue in their minds.
‘Sexy’ Biden and family get-togethers: Comer views new email details Emails provided to House Oversight Chair Jim Comer included no smoking guns.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/21/biden-james-comer-emails-00117464 ...While there is significant evidence that Hunter — who has admitted to struggling with substance abuse at the time — made trading on his father’s name a centerpiece of his dealings with foreign business associates, Republicans have yet to turn up direct evidence* that Joe Biden benefited personally or that he took any official action as a result of those connections...
* Or any shred of evidence at all.
The impeachment effort is a travesty - and includes demonstrable lies
..A May, 27, 2016 schedule card includes a call with former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko. Hunter Biden was copied on the day’s schedule. It’s already been reported that Biden was also due to attend the one-year anniversary of the passing of his son, Beau, back home in Delaware. Comer had been pointing to this scheduling item, since it was also emailed to then-Vice President Biden under a pseudonym email address. Comer even said the vice president was sending a secret message to his son that he was about to fire the prosecutor. As recently as last week, Comer included that email on a list of “evidence” of Joe Biden’s “involvement in his family’s influence peddling schemes.”
The Washington Post had debunked this a few weeks ago by noting that parliament had fired the prosecutor two months prior to Hunter Biden being looped on the day’s itinerary. The only new information in the unredacted version was a phone number of an aide, the sources said...
I’m sorry but this is bullshit. If this was evidence in a case against Trump, Democrats - and people like you - would be all over it. The Hunter Biden scandal is a shocker
Just because it might benefit Trump if Biden goes down does not exonerate Sleepy Joe
Oh and on the seven bins thing this is smart by Sunak because in many peoples' minds the feeling is "they're coming for my turkey twizzlers" and are going to tax me for watching Netflix unless I offset the carbon used while I do so.
So this tells those people that the government is "on their side" and if the Hampstead champagne socialists want to forego one of their holidays - their flight to Costa Rica, perhaps, then that's fine by them.
Sunak is offering imaginary cures for imaginary diseases. The oldest political snake oil known.
It is creating mood music and will be well-understood by its target audience.
See: £350m spent on the NHS.
The more people say well meat tax was never a thing the more the govt can keep that issue in peoples' minds because there sure are going to be a lot of green taxes, ULEZ being a prime example.
ULEZ is an anti-pollution tax, not a Green Tax.
There is a smallish green benefit, however that is not the aim of the target set by the Government.
Cash? I drove to Glasgow and back yesterday for a business meeting. Forgot my wallet. Happily navigated around, paid for items, even got signed into Costco just using my phone.
Liberating...
Yep.
Now just get rid of your wallet full stop.
I haven't carried one for years. They are entirely unnecessary, just a bulky burden that ruins the line of your suit trousers.
Phones are great and I use mine for almost everything, but there are still a couple of occasions when I need cash:
1) To pay the chap at the local Thai takeaway. He prefers cash (and gives a discount) because of the fees charged by the card payment processor.
2) To give to buskers/beggars when I have a rare fit of generosity.
Further down in the article, police nab other road users too.
One of the first things one notices when visiting London is how a lot of cyclists jump red lights, which they don't in most of the rest of the country. How and when did that become a common thing to do?
From watching dashcam channels, I'd say traffic light observance is better in London, even among cyclists but perhaps that is the way they are edited. In Central London, there are a lot more cyclists than most places, which means there are also more cyclists jumping lights.
Here is Ashley Neal commenting on waiting for cyclists, but note none of them jump the lights. There are just more cyclists than he has seen in Liverpool and possibly than the Highway Code people have seen. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PT4rO3GIyLY&t=94s
Oh and on the seven bins thing this is smart by Sunak because in many peoples' minds the feeling is "they're coming for my turkey twizzlers" and are going to tax me for watching Netflix unless I offset the carbon used while I do so.
So this tells those people that the government is "on their side" and if the Hampstead champagne socialists want to forego one of their holidays - their flight to Costa Rica, perhaps, then that's fine by them.
Sunak is offering imaginary cures for imaginary diseases. The oldest political snake oil known.
It is creating mood music and will be well-understood by its target audience.
See: £350m spent on the NHS.
The more people say well meat tax was never a thing the more the govt can keep that issue in peoples' minds because there sure are going to be a lot of green taxes, ULEZ being a prime example.
The more people say you are a liar the more people will keep that issue in their minds.
The £350m was a masterstroke. It plonked down a number plucked from thin air and then the entire debate was hitched to whether it was £350m or £250 or some other huge number. That's politics.
People often say that Remain were beaten by the side of a bus and we intelligent types might wail and gnash our teeth but it's not all wrong.
So where of course does that leave politics. In the gutter is the obvious answer but we get the politicians we elect and deserve.
Further down in the article, police nab other road users too.
One of the first things one notices when visiting London is how a lot of cyclists jump red lights, which they don't in most of the rest of the country. How and when did that become a common thing to do?
The vast majority of cyclists jump red lights it is just part of London, unfortunately.
It's because of the light phasing. You spend too much time sitting stationary at red lights with no traffic coming the other way. It's the same reason that in London most pedestrians don't wait for the green man before crossing the road. There is usually a large gap long before the lights change.
In fact I have worked out round my way that pressing the button on the pedestrian crossing control at road junctions makes no difference whatsoever, it never stops the traffic and the light will change to green at the same point in the cycle whether you press it or not. And I will usually have crossed long before then.
Cyclists adopt the same principle.
(Edited to remove vanilla nonsense and a schoolboy spelling error)
Oh and on the seven bins thing this is smart by Sunak because in many peoples' minds the feeling is "they're coming for my turkey twizzlers" and are going to tax me for watching Netflix unless I offset the carbon used while I do so.
So this tells those people that the government is "on their side" and if the Hampstead champagne socialists want to forego one of their holidays - their flight to Costa Rica, perhaps, then that's fine by them.
Sunak is offering imaginary cures for imaginary diseases. The oldest political snake oil known.
It is creating mood music and will be well-understood by its target audience.
See: £350m spent on the NHS.
The more people say well meat tax was never a thing the more the govt can keep that issue in peoples' minds because there sure are going to be a lot of green taxes, ULEZ being a prime example.
ULEZ is an anti-pollution tax, not a Green Tax.
There is a smallish green benefit, however that is not the aim of the target set by the Government.
It's in the they're coming for you and want to tax you bucket.
‘Sexy’ Biden and family get-togethers: Comer views new email details Emails provided to House Oversight Chair Jim Comer included no smoking guns.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/21/biden-james-comer-emails-00117464 ...While there is significant evidence that Hunter — who has admitted to struggling with substance abuse at the time — made trading on his father’s name a centerpiece of his dealings with foreign business associates, Republicans have yet to turn up direct evidence* that Joe Biden benefited personally or that he took any official action as a result of those connections...
* Or any shred of evidence at all.
The impeachment effort is a travesty - and includes demonstrable lies
..A May, 27, 2016 schedule card includes a call with former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko. Hunter Biden was copied on the day’s schedule. It’s already been reported that Biden was also due to attend the one-year anniversary of the passing of his son, Beau, back home in Delaware. Comer had been pointing to this scheduling item, since it was also emailed to then-Vice President Biden under a pseudonym email address. Comer even said the vice president was sending a secret message to his son that he was about to fire the prosecutor. As recently as last week, Comer included that email on a list of “evidence” of Joe Biden’s “involvement in his family’s influence peddling schemes.”
The Washington Post had debunked this a few weeks ago by noting that parliament had fired the prosecutor two months prior to Hunter Biden being looped on the day’s itinerary. The only new information in the unredacted version was a phone number of an aide, the sources said...
I’m sorry but this is bullshit. If this was evidence in a case against Trump, Democrats - and people like you - would be all over it. The Hunter Biden scandal is a shocker
Just because it might benefit Trump if Biden goes down does not exonerate Sleepy Joe
Balls. There is zero evidence against Joe Biden, so there's nothing to "exonerate".
"If this were a case against Trum", it would be against Trump. If it were against one of his kids, and there were no direct connection with Trump himself, no one would be interested.
That's the point - members of Trump's family held positions in his administration.
Further down in the article, police nab other road users too.
One of the first things one notices when visiting London is how a lot of cyclists jump red lights, which they don't in most of the rest of the country. How and when did that become a common thing to do?
From watching dashcam channels, I'd say traffic light observance is better in London, even among cyclists but perhaps that is the way they are edited. In Central London, there are a lot more cyclists than most places, which means there are also more cyclists jumping lights.
Here is Ashley Neal commenting on waiting for cyclists, but note none of them jump the lights. There are just more cyclists than he has seen in Liverpool and possibly than the Highway Code people have seen. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PT4rO3GIyLY&t=94s
Better in London than where? In the villages, small towns and medium-sized towns I visit I very rarely see a cyclist jumping red lights.
For some reason, that is all I hear in my head when I read seven bins.
Seven bins for the dwarf lords
Middle earth Enterprises came down like a ton of bricks on a company that advertised itself as "Lord of the Bins", and used a very similar logo to the films.
Oh and on the seven bins thing this is smart by Sunak because in many peoples' minds the feeling is "they're coming for my turkey twizzlers and are going to tax me for watching Netflix unless I offset the carbon used in so doing".
So this tells those people that the government is "on their side" and if the Hampstead champagne socialists want to forego one of their holidays - their flight to Costa Rica, perhaps, or pay a huge and voluntary amount of tax on a trip to Spain, then that's fine by them.
"Hampstead champagne socialists"
Your right, let's not restrict them geographically. *Anywhere* champagne socialists.
tyvm
*you're
Like taking candy off a baby.
Congratulations on your performative stupidity. You might want to switch it off from time to time just in case people start to really believe.
'Plant-based' is a stupid shift in language because it reduces the amount of useful information.
Vegetarian has a clear meaning. Vegan has a clear meaning. Plant-based also has a clear meaning by itself, but if you're a vegan you have no idea if something that's just 'plant-based' is ok or not.
Just label and name stuff clearly so people can make an informed choice without having to read the tiny print on the back.
Plant based is perfectly clear. If something is plant based, there ain't no animal bits in it, plus it doesn't trigger snow flake meat eaters like Vegan does. Also, you can have a plant based diet but not be Vegan. Great, innit?
I like my plant based food.
Grass fed beef.
Corn fed chicken.
What's not to like?
“I like my food plant based” would have been funnier 😊
Cash? I drove to Glasgow and back yesterday for a business meeting. Forgot my wallet. Happily navigated around, paid for items, even got signed into Costco just using my phone.
Liberating...
Yep.
Now just get rid of your wallet full stop.
I haven't carried one for years. They are entirely unnecessary, just a bulky burden that ruins the line of your suit trousers.
Phones are great and I use mine for almost everything, but there are still a couple of occasions when I need cash:
1) To pay the chap at the local Thai takeaway. He prefers cash (and gives a discount) because of the fees charged by the card payment processor.
Tax dodge. The commission charged on card transfers is tiny these days and much less than the cost of handling cash in a business.
2) To give to buskers/beggars when I have a rare fit of generosity.
And some bad news for Wales.... Superstar Louis Rees Zammit has been banned from playing in Wales home games for the 2023-24 season. He was clocked at 24.6 mph during Wales recent win against Portugal, which exceeds the new Welsh speed restrictions. First Minister Mark Drakeford said 'This young mans reckless behaviour sets a terrible example for other players which endangers not just other players and officials but the 74,000 spectators inside the stadium'. As well as the ban, he will have to attend a Slow Speed School which has already been pioneered by Steve Borthwick.
I've been trying to get my head around this interactive map of the new speed limits, and I'm baffled.
The A493 from Tywyn to Dolgellau goes through a number of small villages. One of them is my old stamping ground of Llwyngwril.
If I read the map aright, they have kept the limit at 30 from Llangelynin to Llwyngwril, reduced it to 20 at Llwyngwril itself, *kept it at 20* from Llwyngwril to Friog, and *increased* it to 30 going through Friog itself.
If correct, that's madness.
And if not, the map can't be relied on.
But there, Drakeford couldn't even spell Llwyngwril.
There are quite a few anomalies, although that is the work of the individual council. The Vale Council have managed the transition very well. I was in Pembrokeshire earlier in the week and between Haverfordwest and Milford Haven the speed limit is 20 through Johnston which is insanely slow. Your post nonetheless puts pay to BigG's assertion than there is a blanket reduction.
Personally I am not averse to the changes when implemented sensibly, but it does play into Rishi's new role as the poor motorist's friend. The 20 policy, like ULEZ, both of which the Conservatives claim to hate, despite having their fingerprints all over them play into Rishi's rather clever, if cynical and untrue narrative that Labour will repossess everyone's ICE cars on January 1, 2030. I think we would all laugh out loud if Drakeford delivered Rishi a magnificent and comprehensive victory at the next GE.
Can I ask you a genuine question as one of only a few Welsh posters on this forum
Do you agree the implementation has been terrible and generated a lot of genuine anger, and that the Senedd petitions committee will report factually on the petition, it will be subject to a Senedd debate, and that whilst the 20mph rule remain, many of the present changes will be reviewed and sensible changes made ?
On the whole in the Vale there has clearly been a lot of thought gone into the roll out. There has been chaos elsewhere. Carmarthenshire council installed 20s a few weeks ago and removed the black cellophane so we had twenty and thirty signs together.
There is a great deal of animosity, not least because of political opportunism. The petition, I am fairly sure has partially been hijacked by political opponents of Labour. Do you not agree that RT Davies has been disingenuous with his u-turned opposition to the scheme? I am busy exchanging photos of gear knobs with 1, 2 and R only displayed, and the Louis Rees Zammit speed ban. They are rather funny, but I don't oppose the scheme in principle, and of course any teething problems should be rectified as soon as possible.
Andrew Davies and the Conservatives in the Senedd are now diametrically opposed and would return all 20s to 30s, which of course would mean an additional dead child or two each year. Do you agree with that approach?
No - I do not agree with RT Davies or the conservatives on this
I like to think that I am moderate in my views, and certainly 20mph zones have their place and indeed have been in various locations, especially schools, for a long time
The issues is that some of the reductions need to be revisited and a sensible compromise arrived at
Go safe has deemed 26mph will be the point of prosecution, and this morning I did detect an increase in speed towards this rather than previously when many drivers stuck to 20mph
Additionally there are many roads that simply will not be speed controlled where I expect 25 - 30mph to happen
I do not expect this to have any influence on the next GE, but I do detect an increase in support for the conservatives in the Senedd but whether that continues only time will tell
As in all things, there are extreme views on both sides but sensible compromise is the way to make this work in everyone interests
That sounds sensible, @Big_G_NorthWales. Some will be revisited, and there is provision for that.
The position being taken by Howard Cox is now "20mph zones outside schools" and even Susan Hall is "20mph limits in residential areas". They have started to move.
But if we say 20mh outside schools 'for the children', what about parks and nurseries, estates where kids play and so on? And then pedestrian crossings where a vehicle racing through on the outside lane (or the wrong side of the road) risks a pedestrian unseen behind a vehicle stopped in the nearside lane at eg a Zebra? Those are equally strong cases for applying rather more control to the behaviour of people driving around at inappropriate speed.
The logic leads to default 20mph in urban areas, with limited exceptions - perhaps where pedestrian crossings need to be signal-controlled and separated mobility infrastructure provided.
I think we will get to such a position eventually.
What worries me is that children and pedestrians generally seem to be more cavalier about stepping into the road, perhaps because they know about the Highway Code changes, or perhaps because they are staring at their phones.
Just up the road is a 20mph zone for about half a mile, taking in two primary schools and one secondary. Sure, it protects the children but maybe someone should also teach them to cross the road safely. The schools also have lollipop men and women, and zebra or pelican crossings, so perhaps it is all moot.
Further down in the article, police nab other road users too.
One of the first things one notices when visiting London is how a lot of cyclists jump red lights, which they don't in most of the rest of the country. How and when did that become a common thing to do?
The vast majority of cyclists jump red lights it is just part of London, unfortunately.
It's because of the light phasing. You spend too much time sitting stationary at red lights with no traffic coming the other way. It's the same reason that in London most pedestrians don't wait for the green man before crossing the road. There is usually a large gap long before the lights change.
In fact I have worked out round my way that pressing the button on the pedestrian crossing control at road junctions makes no difference whatsoever, it never stops the traffic and the light will change to green at the same point in the cycle whether you press it or not. And I will usually have crossed long before then.
Cyclists adopt the same principle.
(Edited to remove vanilla nonsense and a schoolboy spelling error)
That is true. I often sit, alone, at one of the several bike red lights around Birdcage Walk where a car couldn't hit you if it tried, and there are no pedestrians. That said, plenty of people on bikes blithely cycle across Ludgate Circus without slowing down at all.
Further down in the article, police nab other road users too.
One of the first things one notices when visiting London is how a lot of cyclists jump red lights, which they don't in most of the rest of the country. How and when did that become a common thing to do?
From watching dashcam channels, I'd say traffic light observance is better in London, even among cyclists but perhaps that is the way they are edited. In Central London, there are a lot more cyclists than most places, which means there are also more cyclists jumping lights.
Here is Ashley Neal commenting on waiting for cyclists, but note none of them jump the lights. There are just more cyclists than he has seen in Liverpool and possibly than the Highway Code people have seen. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PT4rO3GIyLY&t=94s
I did witness several (lycra-clad) cyclists give another cyclist a bollocking on the Embankment for going through one of the infrequent cycle red lights on the cycle lane.
Zac Goldsmith was critical of Sunak’s Net Zero policy change. Kemi Badenoch was quoted in the Standard criticising Goldsmith, saying, “Zac Goldsmith is someone who cares very much about the environment,... But the fact is, he has way more money than pretty much everyone in the UK.”
That’s a brave line to take when Rishi Sunak has way more money than Zac Goldsmith!
The theory of “luxury beliefs” is going to be an increasingly important political issue in the next few years.
It starts with mocking those who turn up to climate change summits in private planes, but quickly goes into retail local politics, with Conservatives pointing at Sadiq Khan and Mark Drakeford as evidence that Labour want to make cars something that only the rich have, and everyone else can get the bus.
Same with the ‘meat tax’. Fillet steak and caviar for the climate summit attendees, but bugs and salad for the rest of us.
Sure. If you want to hate your enemies out of fear of the unknown, nobody can stop you. It is an update of the paranoid theories that Jewish monied elites control everything and kill Christian babies.
Oh, the “It’s not really happening, it’s a mad conspiracy theory” argument.
It’s really happening, in the real world.
Please show us your "real world" evidence for Labour's 'meat tax' plans, which Sunak recently referred to ?
The real world seems to be that our PM has engaged in a dishonest smear campaign, which he kicked off just as Parliament went into recess. Neatly avoiding Parliamentary scrutiny of his shoddy policy changes.
Did Sunak specifically refer to Labour’s meat tax plans? I might have missed that.
Labour’s taxes and restrictions on motorists, on the other hand, are very clear for everyone to see in London and Wales.
I think he referred to Meat Tax plans which apparentl exist out there somewhere, amongst the other things he is going to stop that were not going to happen anyway - but did not link it to Labour.
Of course there is currently no meat tax nor plans but it is dishonest to pretend this is not something that is being considered or looked at by policy makers or influencers in the environmental debate. Labour does not have a meat tax plan, I did not hear him make that claim.
There are currently no firm policies on many issues. It does not mean they are not being reviewed, looked at or discussed by various policy framing organisations.
The framing was Labour would inflict these new taxes and onerous measures on you . Sunak pretends he’s different to Johnson but is the same liar just dressed in a better suit .
How often has Labour used a policy idea floated by one of the Tories’ lunatic fringe as a political weapon? That’s all that happening here.
For example, only today they were saying “Let’s stop Truss ever having another budget” No one serious is suggesting that idea and yet Labour weaponise the fear.
My heart goes out to the folk of Mid Beds. I’d be fair set to firebomb all three party HQs by now.
We thank you. Though to be fair the change in weather means we’ve had the fire lit, so the leaflets have been handy twisted up as lighters.
For those upthread talking up a LibDem win in Mid-Beds: be careful. It’s not that sort of demographic anyway, and many lapsed Tories that the LibDems might have a chance to convince elsewhere will go for the Independent.
'Plant-based' is a stupid shift in language because it reduces the amount of useful information.
Vegetarian has a clear meaning. Vegan has a clear meaning. Plant-based also has a clear meaning by itself, but if you're a vegan you have no idea if something that's just 'plant-based' is ok or not.
Just label and name stuff clearly so people can make an informed choice without having to read the tiny print on the back.
Plant based is perfectly clear. If something is plant based, there ain't no animal bits in it, plus it doesn't trigger snow flake meat eaters like Vegan does. Also, you can have a plant based diet but not be Vegan. Great, innit?
I like my plant based food.
Grass fed beef.
Corn fed chicken.
What's not to like?
“I like my food plant based” would have been funnier 😊
Before Covid, the plant-based non-sausage rolls were outselling the meat sausage ones in our staff canteen. Try some of the plant-based food next time you are shopping. It has come a long way since Quorn and tofu. You might even like it.
I think he referred to Meat Tax plans which apparentl exist out there somewhere, amongst things he is going to stop that were not going to happen anyway - but did not link it to Labour. Have we all seen the graphic?
He says "we're stopping" measures like "taxes on eating meat" and "compulsory car sharing". The implication ios clearly that unless the Government took action, these measures were going to come in (one could even read it as meaning that the Government planned to introduce them). This is such nonsense that it's boring to even refute it. Something suggested by the odd think-tank or green politician is not "a measure that needs stopping". And actually I'm unaware of a single institute or politician anywhere on the planet who has proposed "compulsory car-sharing". It's just a preposterous pyramid of piffle, as Boris might say.
Not here (yet) but car sharing is compulsory in some States. I've seen it.
"Arizona has HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) lanes. It is illegal to drive in these lanes with less than two people Monday through Friday during the posted times."
That’s not the same thing at all.
It’s not compulsory to car share
But they offer a (marginally) faster lane to drive in if you do. That’s an incentive based approach.
If Labour can frame green issues in a more local/tangible way I reckon they’ll be onto a winner.
It’s hard to see a global increase of 0.3°; it is much easier to see your rivers being filled with sewage and your beaches covered in dead sealife.
My pet theory is that most people really do care about environmental issues, but are turned off by global intangibles. Labour’s job is to frame the argument correctly.
Most people do care, but they don’t want to wear hair shirts.
I had to rebut an "idea" of a vegetarian only main course at an industry dinner on Monday, I'm a member of the planning committee.
I said it would risk patronising and alienating people, and many wouldn't come again.
Is the problem that it would be telegraphed in an earnest, virtue-signally way?
I mean, if it was an informal occasion and the food was, say, pizza and salad with no patronising bollux attached you wouldn't mind would you?
There's that too.
This stuff really yanks people's chain, but they complain in private (and vote with their feet) lest they come across as a denier or uncommitted.
It is very unpopular.
Yeah we had something similar at work, a poor idea just moving through the committees with no one objecting but as soon as someone did a few other people felt like they could speak up and then suddenly management realised just how unpopular their idea was so they reversed it.
Yes not uncommon. Like @Anabobazina I wouldn't mind a veggie main meal even though I am a meat eater. I would draw the line at vegan as that in my opinion would put people off and definitely question the motives of that being proposed so @Casino_Royale probably has a decent point for those who don't want a veggie meal forced upon them.
Went to a wedding with vegan only food (the bride and groom both vegan). I'm also an omnivore, but I must say that it was truly excellent. Whether meat, animal-derived or vegan matters much less than the quality of the ingredients and cooking. Agree that I'd struggle with full-time vegan diet, while I'd have no real problem with vegetarian - I'm very happy to eat good meat, raised well, but it wouldn't ruin my life to stop.
I do suspect CR is right in that some might be put off attending by an advertised vegetarian menu.
You haven’t lived if you haven’t been to an Indian wedding where the bride and groom turn up two hours late, the food is all vegetarian, and the bar is dry…
Several of us sneaked out quickly to another hotel two doors down, where we could get a burger and a beer.
I went to one such. Thankfully, a lot of younger guests had sneaked in bottles of champagne, which they mixed with the orange juice.
Ah, you were lucky to go with people who had been to such events previously!
Obviously, if I get an invite to another one where the food and drink menu might be a little unorthodox for my liking, I shall remember to hide a bottle in my coat.
'Plant-based' is a stupid shift in language because it reduces the amount of useful information.
Vegetarian has a clear meaning. Vegan has a clear meaning. Plant-based also has a clear meaning by itself, but if you're a vegan you have no idea if something that's just 'plant-based' is ok or not.
Just label and name stuff clearly so people can make an informed choice without having to read the tiny print on the back.
Plant based is perfectly clear. If something is plant based, there ain't no animal bits in it, plus it doesn't trigger snow flake meat eaters like Vegan does. Also, you can have a plant based diet but not be Vegan. Great, innit?
I like my plant based food.
Grass fed beef.
Corn fed chicken.
What's not to like?
“I like my food plant based” would have been funnier 😊
Before Covid, the plant-based non-sausage rolls were outselling the meat sausage ones in our staff canteen. Try some of the plant-based food next time you are shopping. It has come a long way since Quorn and tofu. You might even like it.
Don't those vegan foods run headlong into the anti-ultra-processed food campaigns that everyone is now running (eg Zoe, NHS, Woman's Hour, younameit).
Comments
https://www.sixt.com/magazine/tips/driving-tips-arizona/
"Arizona has HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) lanes. It is illegal to drive in these lanes with less than two people Monday through Friday during the posted times."
Does that make taking the bus compulsory ?
Someone should get Rishi to do something about that encroaching tyranny.
The Climate Change Committee talked about government encouraging people to eat less meat, but didn't say through taxes. Same for car sharing. There's just enough truth to cover the fabrication.
Rishi wants to be like Boris, he wants to be like Dom. But without their charisma (and in their different ways, they had the charisma to largely avoid being called out on lies), he just sounds dishonest.
Maybe there is something in the charisma theory. But if the causality goes "a charismatic leader can get away with bigger lies and that's why they win", that's depressing.
These are the target voters for Sunak's anti-green pivot. Not so much the actual measures but the underlying message.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-66872320
They've had them since the 80s, as a measure to try to reduce congestion.
This stuff really yanks people's chain, but they complain in private (and vote with their feet) lest they come across as a denier or uncommitted.
It is very unpopular.
The Lutfur Rahman found guilty of corrupt and illegal practices?
As I say, I could see them stopping progress and eg not changing the default speed limit across England, but I don't see them restoring higher speed limits to all the existing measures in the LHAs that have already put them in place.
One of my favourites was one of our deliverers being reported to the police for stealing a pair of trainers from outside a house. The response was that it seemed unlikely that the Head of the local Comprehensive would nick a pair of trainers from outside a house. He had much better opportunities in his work environment.
Liberating...
Isn’t this somewhat self-defeating ? The policy u-turn is illiterate but seems to have duped enough low information voters .
$400 fine for a mannequin passenger. Also been done with blow up grinches and sex-dolls.
https://www.carscoops.com/2021/03/la-driver-sneaks-into-carpool-lane-with-super-realistic-mannequin-but-cops-were-no-dummies/
I do suspect CR is right in that some might be put off attending by an advertised vegetarian menu.
Part of his shtick is that they are being screwed over by the RICH EVUL residents. There is and additional, racist, subtext to that - the RICH EVUL residents are from Other Ethnic Groups.
Independent thinks he is going to win. Nobody else does
Nobody appears to want to vote Tory (we have heard that before and lots do)
None of the soft Tories want to vote Labour but are now confused as to who to vote for. Labour have consolidated their existing vote who aren't tactically switching
LD have a huge opportunity with soft Tories, but need to convince them that is who they have to vote for.
It could go anyway, but the biggest opportunity was for the LDs. Labour or Tories could win on a 3 way split.
This is, largely, a cultural argument between neophiles and luddites. I am absolutely fine for the Neophiles to use their phone for everything, but for me technology was absolutely fine in 2005 and almost nothing (for the end user like me) has come along since which offers significant enough advantages for me to put in the minimal effort of learning how to use it.
Satnavs are a perfect example. As a culture, we managed perfectly well without them before 2005; now people are dependent on them.
Several of us sneaked out quickly to another hotel two doors down, where we could get a burger and a beer.
Now just get rid of your wallet full stop.
I haven't carried one for years. They are entirely unnecessary, just a bulky burden that ruins the line of your suit trousers.
Do it. Life is better without lugging around stupid pieces of paper.
More than 70 ‘Lycra lout’ cyclists face fines for jumping red lights during a police crackdown at one of the Square Mile’s busiest road junctions.
City of London officers also issued bike riders with fixed penalty notices for near misses with pedestrians and vehicles during rush hour.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/police-lycra-louts-jumping-red-lights-in-the-square-mile-b1108748.html
Further down in the article, police nab other road users too.
So the Tories are saying they were going to be bringing in a meat tax, but now won't. Fine. But what's to stop them changing their mind again?
The idea that cash doesn't require electronic systems is utter nonsense. How do you withdraw it?
"Matt Goodwin
@GoodwinMJ
Rishi Sunak got it right on Net Zero. He'll rile the elite but he's speaking for the voters he needs to win back. My latest in @TheSun"
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1705118713697947777
Try it.
(I've only been to one dry wedding; that did feel a bit different!)
Just finished S3/5 of Top Boy, meanwhile - a genuine British classic.
So this tells those people that the government is "on their side" and if the Hampstead champagne socialists want to forego one of their holidays - their flight to Costa Rica, perhaps, or pay a huge and voluntary amount of tax on a trip to Spain, then that's fine by them.
A friend who is vegetarian went to a set meal in France and on telling them he was vegetarian was given a ham omelette!
Fortunately both my niece and friend (contrary to the stereotype) are very tolerant of us meat eaters.
I think it was the interview with Nick Robinson, but he quoted the Climate Change Committee suggesting we should consider cutting back on meat. They've said they never suggested taxes.
The "compulsory" car share one was the same - he put two and two together, got five, and then said five was a "euphemism" for six.
Definitely not any specific Labour plans.
But my point still holds. Whether it's five, fifteen or fifty they will be fast enough to evade a frigate, so we need things capable of immobilising that many ships in the dark and rain. Is anybody actually buying/building/redeploying things to do that? No? Then they're just arsing around. Because that's what politicians do: talk hard and do bugger-all
Notes
* [1] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1186201/19_September_2023_Small_boats_-_time_series.ods , see also https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/migrants-detected-crossing-the-english-channel-in-small-boats .
* [2] https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/irregular-migration-to-the-uk-statistics
The position being taken by Howard Cox is now "20mph zones outside schools" and even Susan Hall is "20mph limits in residential areas". They have started to move.
But if we say 20mh outside schools 'for the children', what about parks and nurseries, estates where kids play and so on? And then pedestrian crossings where a vehicle racing through on the outside lane (or the wrong side of the road) risks a pedestrian unseen behind a vehicle stopped in the nearside lane at eg a Zebra? Those are equally strong cases for applying rather more control to the behaviour of people driving around at inappropriate speed.
The logic leads to default 20mph in urban areas, with limited exceptions - perhaps where pedestrian crossings need to be signal-controlled and separated mobility infrastructure provided.
I think we will get to such a position eventually.
tyvm
As a commercial brand and format though, chapeau. It's a money-hoovering behemoth.
For some reason, that is all I hear in my head when I read seven bins.
It's not just the navigation - the prompts about road signs and traffic rules are invaluable.
See: £350m spent on the NHS.
The more people say well meat tax was never a thing the more the govt can keep that issue in peoples' minds because there sure are going to be a lot of green taxes, ULEZ being a prime example.
I don't want to be charging multiple devices. I don't want to be wearing something on my wrist which I'd worry might get broken or lost (or, to be honest, at all - my habit is to wear a £4 digital watch, when and if I remember. They rarely last more than three or four years, but if it gets lost or smashed or dropped in the sea, it's no big issue.) I don't want to be dependent on carrying a phone around. I don't want to be dependent on carrying my glasses around (to read my phone). I don't want to be dependent on the tech working, because it's a pain in the arse when in doesn't. Some pieces of paper in my wallet just don't have electronic equivalents (e.g. the loyalty card for my local butcher, my Chester zoo membership cards, etc.). I don't want to be stood at a checkout trying to work out how to sign in to my Tesco clubcard app. Carrying a wallet causes me no inconvenience and indeed a mild feeling of something not feeling right when I don't have it. And if I'm honest, no, I don't like the traceability of eveything being done electronically.
That said, I rarely now carry change, which I did four years ago. So maybe in ten years or so I may come around to your way of thinking. It just feels like a massive inconvenience.
Rishi is a bullshitter.
"Misery at airports as e-Gates stop working across UK"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12548249/UK-airports-meltdown-Hundreds-holidaymakers-condemned-queue-hours-overnight-e-gate-passport-controls-stop-working-country.html
Just because it might benefit Trump if Biden goes down does not exonerate Sleepy Joe
There is a smallish green benefit, however that is not the aim of the target set by the Government.
1) To pay the chap at the local Thai takeaway. He prefers cash (and gives a discount) because of the fees charged by the card payment processor.
2) To give to buskers/beggars when I have a rare fit of generosity.
Here is Ashley Neal commenting on waiting for cyclists, but note none of them jump the lights. There are just more cyclists than he has seen in Liverpool and possibly than the Highway Code people have seen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PT4rO3GIyLY&t=94s
People often say that Remain were beaten by the side of a bus and we intelligent types might wail and gnash our teeth but it's not all wrong.
So where of course does that leave politics. In the gutter is the obvious answer but we get the politicians we elect and deserve.
In fact I have worked out round my way that pressing the button on the pedestrian crossing control at road junctions makes no difference whatsoever, it never stops the traffic and the light will change to green at the same point in the cycle whether you press it or not. And I will usually have crossed long before then.
Cyclists adopt the same principle.
(Edited to remove vanilla nonsense and a schoolboy spelling error)
There is zero evidence against Joe Biden, so there's nothing to "exonerate".
"If this were a case against Trum", it would be against Trump.
If it were against one of his kids, and there were no direct connection with Trump himself, no one would be interested.
That's the point - members of Trump's family held positions in his administration.
Just up the road is a 20mph zone for about half a mile, taking in two primary schools and one secondary. Sure, it protects the children but maybe someone should also teach them to cross the road safely. The schools also have lollipop men and women, and zebra or pelican crossings, so perhaps it is all moot.
For example, only today they were saying “Let’s stop Truss ever having another budget” No one serious is suggesting that idea and yet Labour weaponise the fear.
For those upthread talking up a LibDem win in Mid-Beds: be careful. It’s not that sort of demographic anyway, and many lapsed Tories that the LibDems might have a chance to convince elsewhere will go for the Independent.
It’s not compulsory to car share
But they offer a (marginally) faster lane to drive in if you do. That’s an incentive based approach.
Obviously, if I get an invite to another one where the food and drink menu might be a little unorthodox for my liking, I shall remember to hide a bottle in my coat.