The betting money goes on 4 CON by-election losses – politicalbetting.com
The betting money goes on 4 CON by-election losses – politicalbetting.com
There’s now only a fortnight’s campaigning left in the three July 20th by-elections where the Tories are defending all the seats. Mid Beds might have a betting market but so far Nadine Dorries is not resigning although nearly a month ago she said she was going with immediate effect.
Comments
-
When even their own side thinks that the Tories would benefit from a spell of rest and recuperation in opposition, it is hard to argue positively that any by election can be safe for them.
Also first, I guess.3 -
First, surely...
0 -
Morning all and @MikeSmithson I hope you are continuing to make a good recovery.
This betting is remarkable really. If the tories do lose all 4 (3) then it's going to create the media meme going into the election home straight. These are no longer mid-terms. There are two GE election options: Spring (May/June) or Autumn (October). So we're either 10 months away from the election or 15 months away.
Somerton & Frome I totally get, but would still be a stellar LibDem result. It's Selby & Ainsty that would really send shockwaves through the Conservative Party.
2 -
If they do lose the GE, and by a sizeable amount, there's going to be all hell breaking loose within the Party. It will be as acrimonious as anything seen on the Labour side in their own wilderness years.Cicero said:When even their own side thinks that the Tories would benefit from a spell of rest and recuperation in opposition, it is hard to argue positively that any by election can be safe for them.
Also first, I guess.
I predict the Party will have one more lurch to the nasty right, embracing someone like Badenoch, who will then lose the next General Election comprehensively.
Only then will the Party come to its senses and realise that (barring the one exception of the Brexit election), ALL General Elections in the UK are won by winning the centre. A factional party, be it of Left or Right, loses.4 -
Is Dorries actually doing any constituency work or is she like one of those councillors who move, sometimes abroad, but carry on claiming allowances?0
-
That is sort of what happened after 1997. Though tbh the pool of talent they had then looks golden compared to today.Heathener said:
If they do lose the GE, and by a sizeable amount, there's going to be all hell breaking loose within the Party. It will be as acrimonious as anything seen on the Labour side in their own wilderness years.Cicero said:When even their own side thinks that the Tories would benefit from a spell of rest and recuperation in opposition, it is hard to argue positively that any by election can be safe for them.
Also first, I guess.
I predict the Party will have one more lurch to the nasty right, embracing someone like Badenoch, who will then lose the next General Election comprehensively.
Only then will the Party come to its senses and realise that (barring the one exception of the Brexit election), ALL General Elections in the UK are won by winning the centre. A factional party, be it of Left or Right, loses.
From the point of view of the country, the problems we face are pretty daunting even for an A team government, and it could be that Starmer gets overwhelmed by "events". This is why I could see some kind of National Unity administration as a none zero chance in a timeline of 2 Parliaments.
However, the Brexit crisis is, like the Reform bill or the Corn Laws, the kind of thing that triggers a fundamental political realignment, so the Tories, who get the blame for the Brexit fiasco may find that they toil for a very long time before the voters take a second look.
It is why I am pretty bullish on the Lib Dems in the medium term. They benefit more from Tory weakness and the Tories might be weak for quite a while and indeed may never recover4 -
If they get their act together (after the next election) and present a coherent political offering, then absolutely.Cicero said:
That is sort of what happened after 1997. Though tbh the pool of talent they had then looks golden compared to today.Heathener said:
If they do lose the GE, and by a sizeable amount, there's going to be all hell breaking loose within the Party. It will be as acrimonious as anything seen on the Labour side in their own wilderness years.Cicero said:When even their own side thinks that the Tories would benefit from a spell of rest and recuperation in opposition, it is hard to argue positively that any by election can be safe for them.
Also first, I guess.
I predict the Party will have one more lurch to the nasty right, embracing someone like Badenoch, who will then lose the next General Election comprehensively.
Only then will the Party come to its senses and realise that (barring the one exception of the Brexit election), ALL General Elections in the UK are won by winning the centre. A factional party, be it of Left or Right, loses.
From the point of view of the country, the problems we face are pretty daunting even for an A team government, and it could be that Starmer gets overwhelmed by "events". This is why I could see some kind of National Unity administration as a none zero chance in a timeline of 2 Parliaments.
However, the Brexit crisis is, like the Reform bill or the Corn Laws, the kind of thing that triggers a fundamental political realignment, so the Tories, who get the blame for the Brexit fiasco may find that they toil for a very long time before the voters take a second look.
It is why I am pretty bullish on the Lib Dems in the medium term. They benefit more from Tory weakness and the Tories might be weak for quite a while and indeed may never recover
The current one is, by necessity, tactical.
I'll probably vote for them this time if only to give encouragement.
0 -
Apparently Chiang Mai is now fully of westerners in coffee shops complaining about the wifiNigelb said:
WFO - work from overseas - is the new trend.sbjme19 said:Is Dorries actually doing any constituency work or is she like one of those councillors who move, sometimes abroad, but carry on claiming allowances?
0 -
I hadn't realised Sunak was actually given an easy ride by the liaison committee.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/04/rish-finds-the-liaison-committee-forgiving-under-bernards-watch
One reason Bryant sounded quite so rude (and I applaud him for being one of the few to present serious questions) is that Jenkin truncated proceedings significantly.2 -
-
Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-129150043 -
Originally posted in wrong thread!Pro_Rata said:A bit of twitter ramping on Zaporzhizia overnight.
The wind direction was due to switch from Easterly to North Westerly yesterday, and remains broadly Northerly, i.e. away from Russia, for several days.
Some of this may be the bots provoking normals to echo their points, but it's a concern, for sure, that the timing is now.
Should we take this Twitter trend seriously today?0 -
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.2 -
It's not a war against cars.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
The expansion of ULEZ in London has been turned into what you describe as a "war against cars" by Conservative media shills like Nick Ferrari who considers it to be an erosion of personal freedom and an expansion of the nanny state. He goes on about it every day.
The percentage of vehicles that don't comply is now minimal. I keyed in my son's 2003 Mini Cooper S and an old 53 plate Fiesta we once owned and both were compliant. Fairly recent diesels are a different story but it wouldn't be too much trouble to exchange your ten year old diesel for an identical petrol equivalent with the scrappage allowance.5 -
The Greens in Brighton & Hove got totally stuffed - by Labour - because of “greenery” such as cycle lanes and parking charges. Depending on when the GE is they might lose Brighton Pavilion - will largely depend on whether the students are in term or scattered to the winds.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
2 -
Your interpretation could be correct, Mr Northwales. But how then do you explain the rise in the Lib Dem vote?Big_G_NorthWales said:Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.3 -
The fall in the Green vote, accounts for 3/4 of it.ClippP said:
Your interpretation could be correct, Mr Northwales. But how then do you explain the rise in the Lib Dem vote?Big_G_NorthWales said:Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.1 -
Well.
An SNP MP has accused the party’s chief whip at Westminster of bullying in a fresh sign of major division within the party.
Angus Brendan MacNeil made the allegation against Brendan O’Hara after a public bust-up last night in the Commons division lobbies, in which documents were allegedly thrown over parliament’s floor.
The papers were said to be disciplinary notices sent by O’Hara to MacNeil, who represents the Western Isles, about his attendance record in parliament. In a tweet that directly referenced the confrontation, MacNeil said: “General advice — Always stand up to bullies, — esp any abusing their positions — particularly those who scurry around shouting to anyone listening, ‘I’ll get him, I’ll get him, I WILL get him! — mark my words’.
“These are people, who from school, we should get taught to face down.”
Guido Fawkes, the online blog, reported that MacNeil shouted: “You’re a small wee man!” several times at O’Hara before tossing the letters at him and storming off.
Tensions run deep in the SNP about MacNeil’s overall behaviour because he has often criticised party policy and is seen as a close ally of Alex Salmond, the former SNP first minister who formed the Alba Party.
However, the latest dispute is said to revolve almost entirely around MacNeil’s presence in the Commons. MacNeil’s defenders point to the difficult and often unpredictable commute from his constituency to London and the fact he is a single father as reasons for his absences.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/snps-angus-brendan-macneil-accuses-chief-whip-brendan-ohara-of-bullying-p9cn0wt7l0 -
It pointed to my reply to Cicero's post, then.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Seems fair. 😊0 -
If it was really minimal why even bother introducing the scheme in the first place? Its a small minority for sure, but not minimal.Mexicanpete said:
It's not a war against cars.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
The expansion of ULEZ in London has been turned into what you describe as a "war against cars" by Conservative media shills like Nick Ferrari who considers it to be an erosion of personal freedom and an expansion of the nanny state. He goes on about it every day.
The percentage of vehicles that don't comply is now minimal. I keyed in my son's 2003 Mini Cooper S and an old 53 plate Fiesta we once owned and both were compliant. Fairly recent diesels are a different story but it wouldn't be too much trouble to exchange your ten year old diesel for an identical petrol equivalent with the scrappage allowance.
It hits the low and middle paid workers hardest, who are the ones who are shafted continuously by various govt policies.
Middle paid workers are often not eligible for the scrappage scheme. The scrappage scheme pays £2,000. The AA has 23710 second hand cars for sale in London, of those 167 are less than £2,000 (a lot of which won't be compliant either).
It is actually a good scheme, but badly introduced, unnecessarily losing support by not acknowledging and being blase about the real costs imposed during a cost of living crisis.3 -
Have to LOL at The Times quoting Guido. Says a lot about how politics is reported these days, for better and for worse.TheScreamingEagles said:Well.
An SNP MP has accused the party’s chief whip at Westminster of bullying in a fresh sign of major division within the party.
Angus Brendan MacNeil made the allegation against Brendan O’Hara after a public bust-up last night in the Commons division lobbies, in which documents were allegedly thrown over parliament’s floor.
The papers were said to be disciplinary notices sent by O’Hara to MacNeil, who represents the Western Isles, about his attendance record in parliament. In a tweet that directly referenced the confrontation, MacNeil said: “General advice — Always stand up to bullies, — esp any abusing their positions — particularly those who scurry around shouting to anyone listening, ‘I’ll get him, I’ll get him, I WILL get him! — mark my words’.
“These are people, who from school, we should get taught to face down.”
Guido Fawkes, the online blog, reported that MacNeil shouted: “You’re a small wee man!” several times at O’Hara before tossing the letters at him and storming off.
Tensions run deep in the SNP about MacNeil’s overall behaviour because he has often criticised party policy and is seen as a close ally of Alex Salmond, the former SNP first minister who formed the Alba Party.
However, the latest dispute is said to revolve almost entirely around MacNeil’s presence in the Commons. MacNeil’s defenders point to the difficult and often unpredictable commute from his constituency to London and the fact he is a single father as reasons for his absences.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/snps-angus-brendan-macneil-accuses-chief-whip-brendan-ohara-of-bullying-p9cn0wt7l0 -
Ulez is the wrong issue because not many people are affected; it is mainly older diesel drivers (which might include commercial vehicles). LTNs (low traffic neighbourhoods) might be better except the details vary from one to the next. It is unlikely the Conservatives would oppose the cameras because their civil liberties wing would be outvoted by their law and order side.Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.1 -
’small wee man’ would be a tautology. ‘Stupid wee man’ seems more probable.Sandpit said:
Have to LOL at The Times quoting Guido. Says a lot about how politics is reported these days, for better and for worse.TheScreamingEagles said:Well.
An SNP MP has accused the party’s chief whip at Westminster of bullying in a fresh sign of major division within the party.
Angus Brendan MacNeil made the allegation against Brendan O’Hara after a public bust-up last night in the Commons division lobbies, in which documents were allegedly thrown over parliament’s floor.
The papers were said to be disciplinary notices sent by O’Hara to MacNeil, who represents the Western Isles, about his attendance record in parliament. In a tweet that directly referenced the confrontation, MacNeil said: “General advice — Always stand up to bullies, — esp any abusing their positions — particularly those who scurry around shouting to anyone listening, ‘I’ll get him, I’ll get him, I WILL get him! — mark my words’.
“These are people, who from school, we should get taught to face down.”
Guido Fawkes, the online blog, reported that MacNeil shouted: “You’re a small wee man!” several times at O’Hara before tossing the letters at him and storming off.
Tensions run deep in the SNP about MacNeil’s overall behaviour because he has often criticised party policy and is seen as a close ally of Alex Salmond, the former SNP first minister who formed the Alba Party.
However, the latest dispute is said to revolve almost entirely around MacNeil’s presence in the Commons. MacNeil’s defenders point to the difficult and often unpredictable commute from his constituency to London and the fact he is a single father as reasons for his absences.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/snps-angus-brendan-macneil-accuses-chief-whip-brendan-ohara-of-bullying-p9cn0wt7l0 -
It seems it had an effect in Cambridge and even labour's own candidate in Uxbridge contradicts KhanMexicanpete said:
It's not a war against cars.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
The expansion of ULEZ in London has been turned into what you describe as a "war against cars" by Conservative media shills like Nick Ferrari who considers it to be an erosion of personal freedom and an expansion of the nanny state. He goes on about it every day.
The percentage of vehicles that don't comply is now minimal. I keyed in my son's 2003 Mini Cooper S and an old 53 plate Fiesta we once owned and both were compliant. Fairly recent diesels are a different story but it wouldn't be too much trouble to exchange your ten year old diesel for an identical petrol equivalent with the scrappage allowance.
It is also a fact that very many ordinary workers depend on their cars and despite the idea there is a limited scrapage scheme available they simply do not have the means to change their car to avoid a £12.50 a day charge
Indeed it is not only conservative councils who are objecting, we are now seeing Labour ones as well0 -
Khan says that 10% of vehicles are affected, and the councils suing him say that’s a gross underestimate based on little analysis.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Ulez is the wrong issue because not many people are affected; it is mainly older diesel drivers (which might include commercial vehicles). LTNs (low traffic neighbourhoods) might be better except the details vary from one to the next. It is unlikely the Conservatives would oppose the cameras because their civil liberties wing would be outvoted by their law and order side.Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
If only a handful of vehicles are actually affected, then why implement the scheme in the first place, at such huge cost?
The suggestion is that the rules will tighten in the future, bringing many more cars into it. The councils want to get ahead of that, as part of their case.
I agree on LTNs, they are a real mess. The concept of “15-minute cities” is a good one, but it needs to be for new cities, not done by bringing arbitrary restrictions on existing cities - many of which were originally implemented as part of the pandemic emergency legislation, and haven’t been removed afterwards.
There appears to be little understanding from politicians that, outside the very dense city centres, people have cars and will use them, often because there is no reasonable alternative.2 -
Actually it wasn't my interpretation but Election MapsClippP said:
Your interpretation could be correct, Mr Northwales. But how then do you explain the rise in the Lib Dem vote?Big_G_NorthWales said:Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.1 -
When I looked at Electoral Calculus yesterday I was a bit dismissive of their suggestion the Tories could be down to 100 seats, until I started looking at those 100. They contained several that on closer inspection might easily go. My own constituency of Tewkesbury is one, where incumbent Laurence Robertson is fighting off a local scandal and the LDs did very well at the May elections.Heathener said:Morning all and @MikeSmithson I hope you are continuing to make a good recovery.
This betting is remarkable really. If the tories do lose all 4 (3) then it's going to create the media meme going into the election home straight. These are no longer mid-terms. There are two GE election options: Spring (May/June) or Autumn (October). So we're either 10 months away from the election or 15 months away.
Somerton & Frome I totally get, but would still be a stellar LibDem result. It's Selby & Ainsty that would really send shockwaves through the Conservative Party.
You could easily identify other similar 'outliers'.
I really do think an extraordinary result could be on the cards.5 -
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.6 -
Doesn’t look good, certainly.Pro_Rata said:
Originally posted in wrong thread!Pro_Rata said:A bit of twitter ramping on Zaporzhizia overnight.
The wind direction was due to switch from Easterly to North Westerly yesterday, and remains broadly Northerly, i.e. away from Russia, for several days.
Some of this may be the bots provoking normals to echo their points, but it's a concern, for sure, that the timing is now.
Should we take this Twitter trend seriously today?
If the Russians blow Zaporizhia they might well make large parts of their own country and Belarus uninhabitable, but self-harm has never stopped them before.
It depends of course on what exactly they do. Blowing up the whole plant would be disastrous for them too. An attempt at a controlled radiation leak rather less so.0 -
Does it really? Mr Northwest is arguing that there is a reaction against controls on car emissions. And that this favours the Tories. Except that the swing away from Labour and the Green Party seems to favour the Lib Dems very much more. And they, apparently, are also in favour of controlling car emissions etc.Sandpit said:
The fall in the Green vote, accounts for 3/4 of it.ClippP said:
Your interpretation could be correct, Mr Northwales. But how then do you explain the rise in the Lib Dem vote?Big_G_NorthWales said:Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.0 -
It reaches a point where extraordinary results are possible. No one believed in a massive SLAB collapse in 2015 (apart from a few astute punters here) until it happened. Sometimes the polls are to be believed.Peter_the_Punter said:
When I looked at Electoral Calculus yesterday I was a bit dismissive of their suggestion the Tories could be down to 100 seats, until I started looking at those 100. They contained several that on closer inspection might easily go. My own constituency of Tewkesbury is one, where incumbent Laurence Robertson is fighting off a local scandal and the LDs did very well at the May elections.Heathener said:Morning all and @MikeSmithson I hope you are continuing to make a good recovery.
This betting is remarkable really. If the tories do lose all 4 (3) then it's going to create the media meme going into the election home straight. These are no longer mid-terms. There are two GE election options: Spring (May/June) or Autumn (October). So we're either 10 months away from the election or 15 months away.
Somerton & Frome I totally get, but would still be a stellar LibDem result. It's Selby & Ainsty that would really send shockwaves through the Conservative Party.
You could easily identify other similar 'outliers'.
I really do think an extraordinary result could be on the cards.1 -
A legacy of the way Brexit was handled is that we are now conditioned to preferring a policy that has 50% support and meets 100% of our objectives, over one which has 65% support and meets 90% of our objectives.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
I support the scheme but comments such as yours make it hard to do so. Morons = ordinary working people really struggling who have been continually shafted by the Tories.3 -
People on minimum wage jobs, as well as key service workers such as nurses and care assistants, perhaps single mothers with kids in different schools are wondering if they can afford a £2k per year tax on going to work.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
Usually one might expect Labour to stand up for these people, no? Instead with get this reactionary hyperbole that makes no sense.
On your actual point, no, paying £12.50 to the mayor doesn’t reduce pollution. It does raise money though. Big bonus for all the out-of-towners without a vote, who get caught up and unwittingly fined. Great for the car plate closers too, not so much for the millions of innocents dragged into court for that over the years.
0 -
Rather bizarrely, while the Ukranian "bite and hold" grinding offensive depletes the Russian army, and we see rumours that the Russians are going to blow up the nuclear plant (implying a scorched earth abandonment of territory) Russian logistics in Crimea are being impacted by a horde of Russian tourists.ydoethur said:
Doesn’t look good, certainly.Pro_Rata said:
Originally posted in wrong thread!Pro_Rata said:A bit of twitter ramping on Zaporzhizia overnight.
The wind direction was due to switch from Easterly to North Westerly yesterday, and remains broadly Northerly, i.e. away from Russia, for several days.
Some of this may be the bots provoking normals to echo their points, but it's a concern, for sure, that the timing is now.
Should we take this Twitter trend seriously today?
If the Russians blow Zaporizhia they might well make large parts of their own country and Belarus uninhabitable, but self-harm has never stopped them before.
It depends of course on what exactly they do. Blowing up the whole plant would be disastrous for them too. An attempt at a controlled radiation leak rather less so.
https://twitter.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1676440987021762560?t=k8e22fKuYZmsyoXcVYL80g&s=190 -
FPT, I agree with Carnforth. The USA was indeed led by rapacious imperialists, but it expanded by defeating other rapacious imperialists (Spanish, French, British and Indian). That was just the way of the world, till very recently. Right of Conquest was a recognised part of customary international law.0
-
Actually 'Mr North Wales' is linking into an election result and comments by Election Maps and a factual report that the labour candidate is contradicting, in a hustings, the London mayorClippP said:
Does it really? Mr Northwest is arguing that there is a reaction against controls on car emissions. And that this favours the Tories. Except that the swing away from Labour and the Green Party seems to favour the Lib Dems very much more. And they, apparently, are also in favour of controlling car emissions etc.Sandpit said:
The fall in the Green vote, accounts for 3/4 of it.ClippP said:
Your interpretation could be correct, Mr Northwales. But how then do you explain the rise in the Lib Dem vote?Big_G_NorthWales said:Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
@RochdalePioneers rather shouty comment does not alter the fact it is the ordinary person who is trapped in a cost of living crisis and cannot afford to change their car while having to pay a £12.50 daily tax as they go about their lawful business
And this is becoming quite a political issue and not just by the conservatives1 -
I am as interested in the public and political moods as I am the current polls. The Tories are a long way behind in the polls - do we expect them to recover or could they slip further?Foxy said:
It reaches a point where extraordinary results are possible. No one believed in a massive SLAB collapse in 2015 (apart from a few astute punters here) until it happened. Sometimes the polls are to be believed.Peter_the_Punter said:
When I looked at Electoral Calculus yesterday I was a bit dismissive of their suggestion the Tories could be down to 100 seats, until I started looking at those 100. They contained several that on closer inspection might easily go. My own constituency of Tewkesbury is one, where incumbent Laurence Robertson is fighting off a local scandal and the LDs did very well at the May elections.Heathener said:Morning all and @MikeSmithson I hope you are continuing to make a good recovery.
This betting is remarkable really. If the tories do lose all 4 (3) then it's going to create the media meme going into the election home straight. These are no longer mid-terms. There are two GE election options: Spring (May/June) or Autumn (October). So we're either 10 months away from the election or 15 months away.
Somerton & Frome I totally get, but would still be a stellar LibDem result. It's Selby & Ainsty that would really send shockwaves through the Conservative Party.
You could easily identify other similar 'outliers'.
I really do think an extraordinary result could be on the cards.
My conclusion has been "slip further" for a while, and slipping they are on both measures. I struggle to see how they will arrest this slippage, and the longer they leave it to an election the worse it will get. Their 5 priorities don't line up with the electorate and are being grossly and incompetently missed. The cost of living crisis is getting a lot worse even from today's hellish level, and the level of malicious grift seems to find new depths to sink to.
If Sunak called a snap election today I expect Labour would win a comfortable majority. If we drag on through another winter of discontent, and he goes to the country next May, it could be a landslide. And next autumn and beyond? A punishment beating the likes we haven't seen for a century.0 -
Yep, the old diesel vote is not going to save them.RochdalePioneers said:
I am as interested in the public and political moods as I am the current polls. The Tories are a long way behind in the polls - do we expect them to recover or could they slip further?Foxy said:
It reaches a point where extraordinary results are possible. No one believed in a massive SLAB collapse in 2015 (apart from a few astute punters here) until it happened. Sometimes the polls are to be believed.Peter_the_Punter said:
When I looked at Electoral Calculus yesterday I was a bit dismissive of their suggestion the Tories could be down to 100 seats, until I started looking at those 100. They contained several that on closer inspection might easily go. My own constituency of Tewkesbury is one, where incumbent Laurence Robertson is fighting off a local scandal and the LDs did very well at the May elections.Heathener said:Morning all and @MikeSmithson I hope you are continuing to make a good recovery.
This betting is remarkable really. If the tories do lose all 4 (3) then it's going to create the media meme going into the election home straight. These are no longer mid-terms. There are two GE election options: Spring (May/June) or Autumn (October). So we're either 10 months away from the election or 15 months away.
Somerton & Frome I totally get, but would still be a stellar LibDem result. It's Selby & Ainsty that would really send shockwaves through the Conservative Party.
You could easily identify other similar 'outliers'.
I really do think an extraordinary result could be on the cards.
My conclusion has been "slip further" for a while, and slipping they are on both measures. I struggle to see how they will arrest this slippage, and the longer they leave it to an election the worse it will get. Their 5 priorities don't line up with the electorate and are being grossly and incompetently missed. The cost of living crisis is getting a lot worse even from today's hellish level, and the level of malicious grift seems to find new depths to sink to.
If Sunak called a snap election today I expect Labour would win a comfortable majority. If we drag on through another winter of discontent, and he goes to the country next May, it could be a landslide. And next autumn and beyond? A punishment beating the likes we haven't seen for a century.0 -
They won't pay £2k a year to go to work - they'll change the car. As has been discussed it isn't a lot of cars, and the coming changes have been brewing for a long time. When I was banger shopping a few months back so many adverts had ULEZ COMPLIANT on them - we're talking something absolutely ancient that doesn't comply and they will be off the road due to no longer being economical / broken soon anyway.Sandpit said:
People on minimum wage jobs, as well as key service workers such as nurses and care assistants, perhaps single mothers with kids in different schools are wondering if they can afford a £2k per year tax on going to work.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
Usually one might expect Labour to stand up for these people, no? Instead with get this reactionary hyperbole that makes no sense.
On your actual point, no, paying £12.50 to the mayor doesn’t reduce pollution. It does raise money though. Big bonus for all the out-of-towners without a vote, who get caught up and unwittingly fined. Great for the car plate closers too, not so much for the millions of innocents dragged into court for that over the years.
It isn't the people at the bottom objecting. Its ponces like Ferrari, snarling about civil liberties. What about the liberties of the people being polluted into an early grave, or at least into having chronic breathing issues? The Tories don't care about the cost to change car for the little people - not when they are piling on increased costs of everything else they spend money on.3 -
If it is not an issue why has labour's candidate in Uxbridge, openly in a hustings, rejected it in direct confrontation with KhanRochdalePioneers said:
They won't pay £2k a year to go to work - they'll change the car. As has been discussed it isn't a lot of cars, and the coming changes have been brewing for a long time. When I was banger shopping a few months back so many adverts had ULEZ COMPLIANT on them - we're talking something absolutely ancient that doesn't comply and they will be off the road due to no longer being economical / broken soon anyway.Sandpit said:
People on minimum wage jobs, as well as key service workers such as nurses and care assistants, perhaps single mothers with kids in different schools are wondering if they can afford a £2k per year tax on going to work.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
Usually one might expect Labour to stand up for these people, no? Instead with get this reactionary hyperbole that makes no sense.
On your actual point, no, paying £12.50 to the mayor doesn’t reduce pollution. It does raise money though. Big bonus for all the out-of-towners without a vote, who get caught up and unwittingly fined. Great for the car plate closers too, not so much for the millions of innocents dragged into court for that over the years.
It isn't the people at the bottom objecting. Its ponces like Ferrari, snarling about civil liberties. What about the liberties of the people being polluted into an early grave, or at least into having chronic breathing issues? The Tories don't care about the cost to change car for the little people - not when they are piling on increased costs of everything else they spend money on.0 -
Not just Nick Ferrari ‘snarling’, is it?RochdalePioneers said:
They won't pay £2k a year to go to work - they'll change the car. As has been discussed it isn't a lot of cars, and the coming changes have been brewing for a long time. When I was banger shopping a few months back so many adverts had ULEZ COMPLIANT on them - we're talking something absolutely ancient that doesn't comply and they will be off the road due to no longer being economical / broken soon anyway.Sandpit said:
People on minimum wage jobs, as well as key service workers such as nurses and care assistants, perhaps single mothers with kids in different schools are wondering if they can afford a £2k per year tax on going to work.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
Usually one might expect Labour to stand up for these people, no? Instead with get this reactionary hyperbole that makes no sense.
On your actual point, no, paying £12.50 to the mayor doesn’t reduce pollution. It does raise money though. Big bonus for all the out-of-towners without a vote, who get caught up and unwittingly fined. Great for the car plate closers too, not so much for the millions of innocents dragged into court for that over the years.
It isn't the people at the bottom objecting. Its ponces like Ferrari, snarling about civil liberties. What about the liberties of the people being polluted into an early grave, or at least into having chronic breathing issues? The Tories don't care about the cost to change car for the little people - not when they are piling on increased costs of everything else they spend money on.
Someone who suggests that people currently just scraping by, can suddenly buy another car, is very much guilty of the same offence.
And again, if everyone buys a new car, then no-one will be paying the tax, and Khan will instead have wasted millions on the survelliance infrastructure the scheme requires.0 -
Literally the only cars which won't comply are petrol engines from pre 2000 (if a 2003 Mini Cooper S meets the criteria then virtually anything can as that engine is environmentally awful). The issue will be diesel cars that don't use Adblue which yes will be an issue but it's going to be a niche issue on the outskirts of London..RochdalePioneers said:
They won't pay £2k a year to go to work - they'll change the car. As has been discussed it isn't a lot of cars, and the coming changes have been brewing for a long time. When I was banger shopping a few months back so many adverts had ULEZ COMPLIANT on them - we're talking something absolutely ancient that doesn't comply and they will be off the road due to no longer being economical / broken soon anyway.Sandpit said:
People on minimum wage jobs, as well as key service workers such as nurses and care assistants, perhaps single mothers with kids in different schools are wondering if they can afford a £2k per year tax on going to work.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
Usually one might expect Labour to stand up for these people, no? Instead with get this reactionary hyperbole that makes no sense.
On your actual point, no, paying £12.50 to the mayor doesn’t reduce pollution. It does raise money though. Big bonus for all the out-of-towners without a vote, who get caught up and unwittingly fined. Great for the car plate closers too, not so much for the millions of innocents dragged into court for that over the years.
It isn't the people at the bottom objecting. Its ponces like Ferrari, snarling about civil liberties. What about the liberties of the people being polluted into an early grave, or at least into having chronic breathing issues? The Tories don't care about the cost to change car for the little people - not when they are piling on increased costs of everything else they spend money on.1 -
No no - the morons are people like Ferrari. They can afford to change the car but are refusing to do so for civil liberty reasons. Whilst claiming to support the little people at the bottom they claim this would impact. Whilst supporting a party and government who smashes the same people far harder on every other cost of living crisis measure.noneoftheabove said:
A legacy of the way Brexit was handled is that we are now conditioned to preferring a policy that has 50% support and meets 100% of our objectives, over one which has 65% support and meets 90% of our objectives.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
I support the scheme but comments such as yours make it hard to do so. Morons = ordinary working people really struggling who have been continually shafted by the Tories.
At the banger end of the market there is a healthy trade going on - selling ULEZ compliant cars into London, clearing non-compliant cars out of London. So I don't buy the claim that this impacts the lowest paid - and I certainly don't buy the supposition that Tories care about these people. Because its patently clear they don't. This is just crayon politics for morons.1 -
I don't know the ins and outs of this case, but on face value, if he can't do the job properly he should find another job. Hang on, that'd rule out most of the commons🤣TheScreamingEagles said:Well.
An SNP MP has accused the party’s chief whip at Westminster of bullying in a fresh sign of major division within the party.
Angus Brendan MacNeil made the allegation against Brendan O’Hara after a public bust-up last night in the Commons division lobbies, in which documents were allegedly thrown over parliament’s floor.
The papers were said to be disciplinary notices sent by O’Hara to MacNeil, who represents the Western Isles, about his attendance record in parliament. In a tweet that directly referenced the confrontation, MacNeil said: “General advice — Always stand up to bullies, — esp any abusing their positions — particularly those who scurry around shouting to anyone listening, ‘I’ll get him, I’ll get him, I WILL get him! — mark my words’.
“These are people, who from school, we should get taught to face down.”
Guido Fawkes, the online blog, reported that MacNeil shouted: “You’re a small wee man!” several times at O’Hara before tossing the letters at him and storming off.
Tensions run deep in the SNP about MacNeil’s overall behaviour because he has often criticised party policy and is seen as a close ally of Alex Salmond, the former SNP first minister who formed the Alba Party.
However, the latest dispute is said to revolve almost entirely around MacNeil’s presence in the Commons. MacNeil’s defenders point to the difficult and often unpredictable commute from his constituency to London and the fact he is a single father as reasons for his absences.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/snps-angus-brendan-macneil-accuses-chief-whip-brendan-ohara-of-bullying-p9cn0wt7l0 -
According to ScottnPaste yesterday the committee was a disaster for SunakNigelb said:I hadn't realised Sunak was actually given an easy ride by the liaison committee.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/04/rish-finds-the-liaison-committee-forgiving-under-bernards-watch
One reason Bryant sounded quite so rude (and I applaud him for being one of the few to present serious questions) is that Jenkin truncated proceedings significantly.0 -
DELETED weird duplicate0
-
So you’re in favour of taxing the poor £2k a year to get to work or school, because a journalist you don’t like opposes a mayor that you do?RochdalePioneers said:
No no - the morons are people like Ferrari. They can afford to change the car but are refusing to do so for civil liberty reasons. Whilst claiming to support the little people at the bottom they claim this would impact. Whilst supporting a party and government who smashes the same people far harder on every other cost of living crisis measure.noneoftheabove said:
A legacy of the way Brexit was handled is that we are now conditioned to preferring a policy that has 50% support and meets 100% of our objectives, over one which has 65% support and meets 90% of our objectives.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
I support the scheme but comments such as yours make it hard to do so. Morons = ordinary working people really struggling who have been continually shafted by the Tories.
At the banger end of the market there is a healthy trade going on - selling ULEZ compliant cars into London, clearing non-compliant cars out of London. So I don't buy the claim that this impacts the lowest paid - and I certainly don't buy the supposition that Tories care about these people. Because its patently clear they don't. This is just crayon politics for morons.0 -
Wilson, Callaghan, Major, Thatcher, Brown all saw their party’s vote share rise, in the run up to the election, despite massive unpopularity.
Nothing suggests to me that that basic rule will be altered in the run up to the next election.1 -
Oh dear the Uxbridge candidate's volte face looks a bit clunky.
The problem with Greater London is the way the boundaries were drawn in the 1960s. There are one or two places in Bromley and Havering which are really just country villages and I can understand why they might not think pollution is a problem.1 -
The aim is to reduce pollution, not generate tax revenues...Sandpit said:
Not just Nick Ferrari ‘snarling’, is it?RochdalePioneers said:
They won't pay £2k a year to go to work - they'll change the car. As has been discussed it isn't a lot of cars, and the coming changes have been brewing for a long time. When I was banger shopping a few months back so many adverts had ULEZ COMPLIANT on them - we're talking something absolutely ancient that doesn't comply and they will be off the road due to no longer being economical / broken soon anyway.Sandpit said:
People on minimum wage jobs, as well as key service workers such as nurses and care assistants, perhaps single mothers with kids in different schools are wondering if they can afford a £2k per year tax on going to work.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
Usually one might expect Labour to stand up for these people, no? Instead with get this reactionary hyperbole that makes no sense.
On your actual point, no, paying £12.50 to the mayor doesn’t reduce pollution. It does raise money though. Big bonus for all the out-of-towners without a vote, who get caught up and unwittingly fined. Great for the car plate closers too, not so much for the millions of innocents dragged into court for that over the years.
It isn't the people at the bottom objecting. Its ponces like Ferrari, snarling about civil liberties. What about the liberties of the people being polluted into an early grave, or at least into having chronic breathing issues? The Tories don't care about the cost to change car for the little people - not when they are piling on increased costs of everything else they spend money on.
Someone who suggests that people currently just scraping by, can suddenly buy another car, is very much guilty of the same offence.
And again, if everyone buys a new car, then no-one will be paying the tax, and Khan will instead have wasted millions on the survelliance infrastructure the scheme requires.1 -
You say it is not a lot of cars - do you have a link ?RochdalePioneers said:
They won't pay £2k a year to go to work - they'll change the car. As has been discussed it isn't a lot of carsSandpit said:
People on minimum wage jobs, as well as key service workers such as nurses and care assistants, perhaps single mothers with kids in different schools are wondering if they can afford a £2k per year tax on going to work.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
Usually one might expect Labour to stand up for these people, no? Instead with get this reactionary hyperbole that makes no sense.
On your actual point, no, paying £12.50 to the mayor doesn’t reduce pollution. It does raise money though. Big bonus for all the out-of-towners without a vote, who get caught up and unwittingly fined. Great for the car plate closers too, not so much for the millions of innocents dragged into court for that over the years.
And you ignore the real concern of the labour candidate in Uxbridge who I am certain is more aware of the position in his constituency than you are to be fair0 -
Ulez and LTNs are Davos policies. Starmer is Davos man. It's not just Ulez and LTNs, it's green levies, oil shutdown, not being able to afford one's own home, farm shutdown leading to reduced food supply etc. These are desperately unpopular policies, Starmer is up to his neck in them, and whether it's Farage, or whether it's the Tories, whoever has the balls to turn on these policies is going to benefit, stale Government or no.Sandpit said:
So you’re in favour of taxing the poor £2k a year to get to work or school, because a journalist you don’t like opposes a mayor that you do?RochdalePioneers said:
No no - the morons are people like Ferrari. They can afford to change the car but are refusing to do so for civil liberty reasons. Whilst claiming to support the little people at the bottom they claim this would impact. Whilst supporting a party and government who smashes the same people far harder on every other cost of living crisis measure.noneoftheabove said:
A legacy of the way Brexit was handled is that we are now conditioned to preferring a policy that has 50% support and meets 100% of our objectives, over one which has 65% support and meets 90% of our objectives.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
I support the scheme but comments such as yours make it hard to do so. Morons = ordinary working people really struggling who have been continually shafted by the Tories.
At the banger end of the market there is a healthy trade going on - selling ULEZ compliant cars into London, clearing non-compliant cars out of London. So I don't buy the claim that this impacts the lowest paid - and I certainly don't buy the supposition that Tories care about these people. Because its patently clear they don't. This is just crayon politics for morons.0 -
It was a car crash by Sunak, but truncating the committee limited the pile up.NerysHughes said:
According to ScottnPaste yesterday the committee was a disaster for SunakNigelb said:I hadn't realised Sunak was actually given an easy ride by the liaison committee.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/04/rish-finds-the-liaison-committee-forgiving-under-bernards-watch
One reason Bryant sounded quite so rude (and I applaud him for being one of the few to present serious questions) is that Jenkin truncated proceedings significantly.
It was a very poor performance to turn up to the committee and claim not to have read a 3 page report from the privileges committee. Just insulting to the Liaison Committee and to the British public.2 -
Laughable. Nobody is getting taxed in the way you describe. Again, it isn't the poor being effected by this, its the libertarian point-scorers.Sandpit said:
So you’re in favour of taxing the poor £2k a year to get to work or school, because a journalist you don’t like opposes a mayor that you do?RochdalePioneers said:
No no - the morons are people like Ferrari. They can afford to change the car but are refusing to do so for civil liberty reasons. Whilst claiming to support the little people at the bottom they claim this would impact. Whilst supporting a party and government who smashes the same people far harder on every other cost of living crisis measure.noneoftheabove said:
A legacy of the way Brexit was handled is that we are now conditioned to preferring a policy that has 50% support and meets 100% of our objectives, over one which has 65% support and meets 90% of our objectives.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
I support the scheme but comments such as yours make it hard to do so. Morons = ordinary working people really struggling who have been continually shafted by the Tories.
At the banger end of the market there is a healthy trade going on - selling ULEZ compliant cars into London, clearing non-compliant cars out of London. So I don't buy the claim that this impacts the lowest paid - and I certainly don't buy the supposition that Tories care about these people. Because its patently clear they don't. This is just crayon politics for morons.
And "how dare you want to cost poor people money". Please. The same Tories foaming on about this one support every other measure which had brought so many of the poorest - in London and elsewhere - into absolute penury, and now they're working very hard to drag the squeezed middle down as well.
If Tories are so concerned about the budgets of the poorest, why are all of their policies designed to cripple the budgets of the poorest?3 -
Taxing externalities is hardly a controversial policy.Sandpit said:
People on minimum wage jobs, as well as key service workers such as nurses and care assistants, perhaps single mothers with kids in different schools are wondering if they can afford a £2k per year tax on going to work.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
Usually one might expect Labour to stand up for these people, no? Instead with get this reactionary hyperbole that makes no sense.
On your actual point, no, paying £12.50 to the mayor doesn’t reduce pollution. It does raise money though. Big bonus for all the out-of-towners without a vote, who get caught up and unwittingly fined. Great for the car plate closers too, not so much for the millions of innocents dragged into court for that over the years.
We have to raise tax money somehow - better do it in a way that nudges people towards reducing pollution.1 -
Good morning, everyone.
Mr. F, sadly, many idiots try and judge the past morally by modern day standards. It's as delinquent as considering 14th century homes dirty because they didn't have vacuum cleaners, or Roman wars as illegal because they contravened the Geneva Convention when dealing with prisoners.3 -
I saw a brilliant comment the other day. Russians are buying properties in Mariupol, regardless of who owned them before (presumably the money they spend goes straight into the pockets of the Russian government and/or oligarchs). The same thing happened in Crimea, with Ukrainians losing their property.Foxy said:
Rather bizarrely, while the Ukranian "bite and hold" grinding offensive depletes the Russian army, and we see rumours that the Russians are going to blow up the nuclear plant (implying a scorched earth abandonment of territory) Russian logistics in Crimea are being impacted by a horde of Russian tourists.ydoethur said:
Doesn’t look good, certainly.Pro_Rata said:
Originally posted in wrong thread!Pro_Rata said:A bit of twitter ramping on Zaporzhizia overnight.
The wind direction was due to switch from Easterly to North Westerly yesterday, and remains broadly Northerly, i.e. away from Russia, for several days.
Some of this may be the bots provoking normals to echo their points, but it's a concern, for sure, that the timing is now.
Should we take this Twitter trend seriously today?
If the Russians blow Zaporizhia they might well make large parts of their own country and Belarus uninhabitable, but self-harm has never stopped them before.
It depends of course on what exactly they do. Blowing up the whole plant would be disastrous for them too. An attempt at a controlled radiation leak rather less so.
https://twitter.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1676440987021762560?t=k8e22fKuYZmsyoXcVYL80g&s=19
The comment was: "If Ukraine retake Mariupol, who will refund the Russians who have bought property there?"0 -
I’m not so sure. Whilst there is deep loathing now for the Tories, there is no real enthusiasm for Labour. Starmer’s offer is not going to motivate anyone, as it appears at the moment. The one thing I’d bet on with a degree of certainty is that turnout will be on the low side.RochdalePioneers said:
I am as interested in the public and political moods as I am the current polls. The Tories are a long way behind in the polls - do we expect them to recover or could they slip further?Foxy said:
It reaches a point where extraordinary results are possible. No one believed in a massive SLAB collapse in 2015 (apart from a few astute punters here) until it happened. Sometimes the polls are to be believed.Peter_the_Punter said:
When I looked at Electoral Calculus yesterday I was a bit dismissive of their suggestion the Tories could be down to 100 seats, until I started looking at those 100. They contained several that on closer inspection might easily go. My own constituency of Tewkesbury is one, where incumbent Laurence Robertson is fighting off a local scandal and the LDs did very well at the May elections.Heathener said:Morning all and @MikeSmithson I hope you are continuing to make a good recovery.
This betting is remarkable really. If the tories do lose all 4 (3) then it's going to create the media meme going into the election home straight. These are no longer mid-terms. There are two GE election options: Spring (May/June) or Autumn (October). So we're either 10 months away from the election or 15 months away.
Somerton & Frome I totally get, but would still be a stellar LibDem result. It's Selby & Ainsty that would really send shockwaves through the Conservative Party.
You could easily identify other similar 'outliers'.
I really do think an extraordinary result could be on the cards.
My conclusion has been "slip further" for a while, and slipping they are on both measures. I struggle to see how they will arrest this slippage, and the longer they leave it to an election the worse it will get. Their 5 priorities don't line up with the electorate and are being grossly and incompetently missed. The cost of living crisis is getting a lot worse even from today's hellish level, and the level of malicious grift seems to find new depths to sink to.
If Sunak called a snap election today I expect Labour would win a comfortable majority. If we drag on through another winter of discontent, and he goes to the country next May, it could be a landslide. And next autumn and beyond? A punishment beating the likes we haven't seen for a century.1 -
Conservative recovery seems very unlikely, I think. They could fall further, but probably not much.
The SNP's interesting to consider. If Labour makes big gains in Scotland that will help massively because it'll help neutralise the 'in the SNP's pocket' attack by the Conservatives in the future.0 -
The guy in Uxbridge wants to win his byelection and is triangulating. Good for him! And then he will back Khan because he'll be a London MP knowing where the power sits in the regional party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You say it is not a lot of cars - do you have a link ?RochdalePioneers said:
They won't pay £2k a year to go to work - they'll change the car. As has been discussed it isn't a lot of carsSandpit said:
People on minimum wage jobs, as well as key service workers such as nurses and care assistants, perhaps single mothers with kids in different schools are wondering if they can afford a £2k per year tax on going to work.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
Usually one might expect Labour to stand up for these people, no? Instead with get this reactionary hyperbole that makes no sense.
On your actual point, no, paying £12.50 to the mayor doesn’t reduce pollution. It does raise money though. Big bonus for all the out-of-towners without a vote, who get caught up and unwittingly fined. Great for the car plate closers too, not so much for the millions of innocents dragged into court for that over the years.
And you ignore the real concern of the labour candidate in Uxbridge who I am certain is more aware of the position in his constituency than you are to be fair
Again, if the Tories are genuinely concerned about the budgets of the poorest, why are they so unconcerned on every other measure?
This isn't about the poor. Its about the rich. Because if a 20 year old Mini is compliant then practically any old banger which could be used as a daily driver is. Note - Daily Driver. I keep being told the poor will be taxed £2k a day to go to work. Driving what? Do you know how much it costs to keep something truly ancient in use as a daily driver?
This is NOT about them. Because once a car gets past a tipping point it is cheaper to change it. This is about the people who have some cherished old classic they take out on a Sunday. The ones on car forums talking about it. The ones who can afford that kind of hobby vehicle and the cost of keeping it running. Not the poor.1 -
I agree with the aims of ULEZ, but it can't be denied that it is a nice little earner. The website for that and the Congestion charge is shite as well. They have the technology to clock exactly where you've been, but when you log in, you can't actually see if you've been where you shouldn't and have to guess if you need to pay the C charge!RochdalePioneers said:
The aim is to reduce pollution, not generate tax revenues...Sandpit said:
Not just Nick Ferrari ‘snarling’, is it?RochdalePioneers said:
They won't pay £2k a year to go to work - they'll change the car. As has been discussed it isn't a lot of cars, and the coming changes have been brewing for a long time. When I was banger shopping a few months back so many adverts had ULEZ COMPLIANT on them - we're talking something absolutely ancient that doesn't comply and they will be off the road due to no longer being economical / broken soon anyway.Sandpit said:
People on minimum wage jobs, as well as key service workers such as nurses and care assistants, perhaps single mothers with kids in different schools are wondering if they can afford a £2k per year tax on going to work.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
Usually one might expect Labour to stand up for these people, no? Instead with get this reactionary hyperbole that makes no sense.
On your actual point, no, paying £12.50 to the mayor doesn’t reduce pollution. It does raise money though. Big bonus for all the out-of-towners without a vote, who get caught up and unwittingly fined. Great for the car plate closers too, not so much for the millions of innocents dragged into court for that over the years.
It isn't the people at the bottom objecting. Its ponces like Ferrari, snarling about civil liberties. What about the liberties of the people being polluted into an early grave, or at least into having chronic breathing issues? The Tories don't care about the cost to change car for the little people - not when they are piling on increased costs of everything else they spend money on.
Someone who suggests that people currently just scraping by, can suddenly buy another car, is very much guilty of the same offence.
And again, if everyone buys a new car, then no-one will be paying the tax, and Khan will instead have wasted millions on the survelliance infrastructure the scheme requires.
Once most cars meet the standard, what will big cities do next to make up the short fall?1 -
In the Brexit election - whether 2017 or 2019 is meant - the party that didn't actually lose (2017) and the party who won (2019) was the more centrist of the only two options for leading a government.Heathener said:
If they do lose the GE, and by a sizeable amount, there's going to be all hell breaking loose within the Party. It will be as acrimonious as anything seen on the Labour side in their own wilderness years.Cicero said:When even their own side thinks that the Tories would benefit from a spell of rest and recuperation in opposition, it is hard to argue positively that any by election can be safe for them.
Also first, I guess.
I predict the Party will have one more lurch to the nasty right, embracing someone like Badenoch, who will then lose the next General Election comprehensively.
Only then will the Party come to its senses and realise that (barring the one exception of the Brexit election), ALL General Elections in the UK are won by winning the centre. A factional party, be it of Left or Right, loses.
As you say, all elections are won from the centre. The only way Labour can now lose in 2024 is by voters losing faith in their competence (ie not as bad as the Tories) and believing that voting Labour is to vote for the broad left/Jezza alliance rather than for social democrats.
0 -
The Tories might quite like Labour to win Uxbridge and then for the MP to swing in behind ULEZ. It would be a good example of Labour not being honest with the voters.RochdalePioneers said:
The guy in Uxbridge wants to win his byelection and is triangulating. Good for him! And then he will back Khan because he'll be a London MP knowing where the power sits in the regional party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You say it is not a lot of cars - do you have a link ?RochdalePioneers said:
They won't pay £2k a year to go to work - they'll change the car. As has been discussed it isn't a lot of carsSandpit said:
People on minimum wage jobs, as well as key service workers such as nurses and care assistants, perhaps single mothers with kids in different schools are wondering if they can afford a £2k per year tax on going to work.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
Usually one might expect Labour to stand up for these people, no? Instead with get this reactionary hyperbole that makes no sense.
On your actual point, no, paying £12.50 to the mayor doesn’t reduce pollution. It does raise money though. Big bonus for all the out-of-towners without a vote, who get caught up and unwittingly fined. Great for the car plate closers too, not so much for the millions of innocents dragged into court for that over the years.
And you ignore the real concern of the labour candidate in Uxbridge who I am certain is more aware of the position in his constituency than you are to be fair
Again, if the Tories are genuinely concerned about the budgets of the poorest, why are they so unconcerned on every other measure?
This isn't about the poor. Its about the rich. Because if a 20 year old Mini is compliant then practically any old banger which could be used as a daily driver is. Note - Daily Driver. I keep being told the poor will be taxed £2k a day to go to work. Driving what? Do you know how much it costs to keep something truly ancient in use as a daily driver?
This is NOT about them. Because once a car gets past a tipping point it is cheaper to change it. This is about the people who have some cherished old classic they take out on a Sunday. The ones on car forums talking about it. The ones who can afford that kind of hobby vehicle and the cost of keeping it running. Not the poor.1 -
Mr. Stopper, it'll be fun watching them impose it in city's* that don't have London's lavish public transport spending.
Edited extra bit: *cities. Bit sleepy.0 -
Rich world countries have standards of living that are 30 to 60 times the level of subsistence. In such countries the risks of waging wars of conquest far outweigh the rewards. Why go to the trouble of conquering a place (and facing an insurgency) when it’s cheaper to buy their resources?Morris_Dancer said:Good morning, everyone.
Mr. F, sadly, many idiots try and judge the past morally by modern day standards. It's as delinquent as considering 14th century homes dirty because they didn't have vacuum cleaners, or Roman wars as illegal because they contravened the Geneva Convention when dealing with prisoners.
When your standard of living is two or three times subsistence, the balance of risk and reward in wars of conquest is very different. Seizing good farmland from weaker powers is the sensible thing to do.2 -
If we start getting into punishment beating results for the Tories (<100 seats etc) then so many of the losses wouldn't be to Labour, they'd be to the LDs and potentially the Greens or even RefUKnew in places like Thanet.Monksfield said:
I’m not so sure. Whilst there is deep loathing now for the Tories, there is no real enthusiasm for Labour. Starmer’s offer is not going to motivate anyone, as it appears at the moment. The one thing I’d bet on with a degree of certainty is that turnout will be on the low side.RochdalePioneers said:
I am as interested in the public and political moods as I am the current polls. The Tories are a long way behind in the polls - do we expect them to recover or could they slip further?Foxy said:
It reaches a point where extraordinary results are possible. No one believed in a massive SLAB collapse in 2015 (apart from a few astute punters here) until it happened. Sometimes the polls are to be believed.Peter_the_Punter said:
When I looked at Electoral Calculus yesterday I was a bit dismissive of their suggestion the Tories could be down to 100 seats, until I started looking at those 100. They contained several that on closer inspection might easily go. My own constituency of Tewkesbury is one, where incumbent Laurence Robertson is fighting off a local scandal and the LDs did very well at the May elections.Heathener said:Morning all and @MikeSmithson I hope you are continuing to make a good recovery.
This betting is remarkable really. If the tories do lose all 4 (3) then it's going to create the media meme going into the election home straight. These are no longer mid-terms. There are two GE election options: Spring (May/June) or Autumn (October). So we're either 10 months away from the election or 15 months away.
Somerton & Frome I totally get, but would still be a stellar LibDem result. It's Selby & Ainsty that would really send shockwaves through the Conservative Party.
You could easily identify other similar 'outliers'.
I really do think an extraordinary result could be on the cards.
My conclusion has been "slip further" for a while, and slipping they are on both measures. I struggle to see how they will arrest this slippage, and the longer they leave it to an election the worse it will get. Their 5 priorities don't line up with the electorate and are being grossly and incompetently missed. The cost of living crisis is getting a lot worse even from today's hellish level, and the level of malicious grift seems to find new depths to sink to.
If Sunak called a snap election today I expect Labour would win a comfortable majority. If we drag on through another winter of discontent, and he goes to the country next May, it could be a landslide. And next autumn and beyond? A punishment beating the likes we haven't seen for a century.
Starmer is a bit shit - we can all see that. A managerial lets be less corrupt and stupid and uncaring than the Tories government which can't fix so many of the huge issues they inherit. There is no Tony Blair optimistic future mirage to draw people in like in 1997. An election now would see Labour win, but not by a large amount.
My point is that the drag factors on the Tory vote are already back to the Truss pit level and still sinking. With the economy showing all signs of getting far worse and the pain of that drawing in far more people in demographics and locations who would previously have voted Tory as an act of muscle memory.
As was pointed out above, you can look a long way down the targets list and get to somewhere like Tewksbury where the incumbent is making a mess of it and a non-Labour challenger looks doable.1 -
Thames Water is an interesting issue, affecting large areas of Tory heartland. Lots of generally centre right people think water is too important to be left to city sharks, and the government cannot win from here. Either Thames Water survives, but as a daily example of what is wrong with short term capitalism, or it fails at the expense of its users, either through bills or the tax payer. This touches on millions of Tory votes.Monksfield said:
I’m not so sure. Whilst there is deep loathing now for the Tories, there is no real enthusiasm for Labour. Starmer’s offer is not going to motivate anyone, as it appears at the moment. The one thing I’d bet on with a degree of certainty is that turnout will be on the low side.RochdalePioneers said:
I am as interested in the public and political moods as I am the current polls. The Tories are a long way behind in the polls - do we expect them to recover or could they slip further?Foxy said:
It reaches a point where extraordinary results are possible. No one believed in a massive SLAB collapse in 2015 (apart from a few astute punters here) until it happened. Sometimes the polls are to be believed.Peter_the_Punter said:
When I looked at Electoral Calculus yesterday I was a bit dismissive of their suggestion the Tories could be down to 100 seats, until I started looking at those 100. They contained several that on closer inspection might easily go. My own constituency of Tewkesbury is one, where incumbent Laurence Robertson is fighting off a local scandal and the LDs did very well at the May elections.Heathener said:Morning all and @MikeSmithson I hope you are continuing to make a good recovery.
This betting is remarkable really. If the tories do lose all 4 (3) then it's going to create the media meme going into the election home straight. These are no longer mid-terms. There are two GE election options: Spring (May/June) or Autumn (October). So we're either 10 months away from the election or 15 months away.
Somerton & Frome I totally get, but would still be a stellar LibDem result. It's Selby & Ainsty that would really send shockwaves through the Conservative Party.
You could easily identify other similar 'outliers'.
I really do think an extraordinary result could be on the cards.
My conclusion has been "slip further" for a while, and slipping they are on both measures. I struggle to see how they will arrest this slippage, and the longer they leave it to an election the worse it will get. Their 5 priorities don't line up with the electorate and are being grossly and incompetently missed. The cost of living crisis is getting a lot worse even from today's hellish level, and the level of malicious grift seems to find new depths to sink to.
If Sunak called a snap election today I expect Labour would win a comfortable majority. If we drag on through another winter of discontent, and he goes to the country next May, it could be a landslide. And next autumn and beyond? A punishment beating the likes we haven't seen for a century.
Labour would not be blamed for saying 'We want water to be state owned but can't afford it yet. The tax payer will have to pay for Tory failure'.
1 -
Somerton and Frome will likely be a LD hold, Selby neck and neck between Tories and Labour.
Uxbridge and S Ruislip I still think could be a Tory hold with a high pro Rishi Hindu vote there, the Conservative candidate a South Ruislip councillor and the Labour candidate a Camden councillor and Hillingdon council still Tory held and the ULEZ issue0 -
We are increasingly heading towards car-free environments. This ULEZ roll-out is for the weekend cars run out on a sunny Sunday. Then they will tighten the rules and more and more will be impacted.twistedfirestopper3 said:
I agree with the aims of ULEZ, but it can't be denied that it is a nice little earner. The website for that and the Congestion charge is shite as well. They have the technology to clock exactly where you've been, but when you log in, you can't actually see if you've been where you shouldn't and have to guess if you need to pay the C charge!RochdalePioneers said:
The aim is to reduce pollution, not generate tax revenues...Sandpit said:
Not just Nick Ferrari ‘snarling’, is it?RochdalePioneers said:
They won't pay £2k a year to go to work - they'll change the car. As has been discussed it isn't a lot of cars, and the coming changes have been brewing for a long time. When I was banger shopping a few months back so many adverts had ULEZ COMPLIANT on them - we're talking something absolutely ancient that doesn't comply and they will be off the road due to no longer being economical / broken soon anyway.Sandpit said:
People on minimum wage jobs, as well as key service workers such as nurses and care assistants, perhaps single mothers with kids in different schools are wondering if they can afford a £2k per year tax on going to work.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
Usually one might expect Labour to stand up for these people, no? Instead with get this reactionary hyperbole that makes no sense.
On your actual point, no, paying £12.50 to the mayor doesn’t reduce pollution. It does raise money though. Big bonus for all the out-of-towners without a vote, who get caught up and unwittingly fined. Great for the car plate closers too, not so much for the millions of innocents dragged into court for that over the years.
It isn't the people at the bottom objecting. Its ponces like Ferrari, snarling about civil liberties. What about the liberties of the people being polluted into an early grave, or at least into having chronic breathing issues? The Tories don't care about the cost to change car for the little people - not when they are piling on increased costs of everything else they spend money on.
Someone who suggests that people currently just scraping by, can suddenly buy another car, is very much guilty of the same offence.
And again, if everyone buys a new car, then no-one will be paying the tax, and Khan will instead have wasted millions on the survelliance infrastructure the scheme requires.
Once most cars meet the standard, what will big cities do next to make up the short fall?
We're transitioning towards an EV future, and the carrot on offer (a charging/cost infrastructure fit for purpose) isn't big enough. So a big stick will also be needed.0 -
Uxbridge is going to get a lower swing than the others but it'll go Labour. They're just too close there. I expect the Tories will win it back eventually, probably around 2032.0
-
Beales likely won't win many voters back from the Tories who were anti ULEZ from the start but by opposing ULEZ now may well just end up leaking voters to the Green candidateBig_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-129150040 -
So do I, but I suspect that is wishful thinking on my part as I want the LDs to do well. I expect Labour to do very well, but for a complete slaughter the LDs need to do well in the blue wall seats. I am concerned that what might happen here is the Lab vote might be boosted leaving the seats as Tory holds. The LDs need to get their poll rating up still so that blue wall voters believe they are the challengers.Peter_the_Punter said:
When I looked at Electoral Calculus yesterday I was a bit dismissive of their suggestion the Tories could be down to 100 seats, until I started looking at those 100. They contained several that on closer inspection might easily go. My own constituency of Tewkesbury is one, where incumbent Laurence Robertson is fighting off a local scandal and the LDs did very well at the May elections.Heathener said:Morning all and @MikeSmithson I hope you are continuing to make a good recovery.
This betting is remarkable really. If the tories do lose all 4 (3) then it's going to create the media meme going into the election home straight. These are no longer mid-terms. There are two GE election options: Spring (May/June) or Autumn (October). So we're either 10 months away from the election or 15 months away.
Somerton & Frome I totally get, but would still be a stellar LibDem result. It's Selby & Ainsty that would really send shockwaves through the Conservative Party.
You could easily identify other similar 'outliers'.
I really do think an extraordinary result could be on the cards.
Polls like that Mid Beds poll don't help as that will split the vote so I wouldn't be surprised in seeing Tories putting out misinformation about the Lab threat in these seats as per the Telegraph.
Currently I wouldn't be surprised if the LDs make just 10 gains, but could easily make 50 gains.2 -
sbjme19 said:
Oh dear the Uxbridge candidate's volte face looks a bit clunky.
The problem with Greater London is the way the boundaries were drawn in the 1960s. There are one or two places in Bromley and Havering which are really just country villages and I can understand why they might not think pollution is a problem.
"Gaily into Ruislip Gardens
Runs the red electric train,
With a thousand Ta's and Pardon's
Daintily alights Elaine;
Hurries down the concrete station
With a frown of concentration,
Out into the outskirt's edges
Where a few surviving hedges
Keep alive our lost Elysium - rural Middlesex again."
Time to bring beloved Middlesex back, with its one or two remaining villages - where I was brought up.1 -
Conservative recovery seems unlikely, but only insofar as recovery for any inept fag end administration seems unlikely.Morris_Dancer said:Conservative recovery seems very unlikely, I think. They could fall further, but probably not much.
The SNP's interesting to consider. If Labour makes big gains in Scotland that will help massively because it'll help neutralise the 'in the SNP's pocket' attack by the Conservatives in the future.
The economic outlook in 2009 was far worse than it is now, but Labour still put on 9% between the local elections that year and the GE.
0 -
Even on the "cherished old classic" front there is a ulez exemption for historic vehicles.RochdalePioneers said:
The guy in Uxbridge wants to win his byelection and is triangulating. Good for him! And then he will back Khan because he'll be a London MP knowing where the power sits in the regional party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You say it is not a lot of cars - do you have a link ?RochdalePioneers said:
They won't pay £2k a year to go to work - they'll change the car. As has been discussed it isn't a lot of carsSandpit said:
People on minimum wage jobs, as well as key service workers such as nurses and care assistants, perhaps single mothers with kids in different schools are wondering if they can afford a £2k per year tax on going to work.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
Usually one might expect Labour to stand up for these people, no? Instead with get this reactionary hyperbole that makes no sense.
On your actual point, no, paying £12.50 to the mayor doesn’t reduce pollution. It does raise money though. Big bonus for all the out-of-towners without a vote, who get caught up and unwittingly fined. Great for the car plate closers too, not so much for the millions of innocents dragged into court for that over the years.
And you ignore the real concern of the labour candidate in Uxbridge who I am certain is more aware of the position in his constituency than you are to be fair
Again, if the Tories are genuinely concerned about the budgets of the poorest, why are they so unconcerned on every other measure?
This isn't about the poor. Its about the rich. Because if a 20 year old Mini is compliant then practically any old banger which could be used as a daily driver is. Note - Daily Driver. I keep being told the poor will be taxed £2k a day to go to work. Driving what? Do you know how much it costs to keep something truly ancient in use as a daily driver?
This is NOT about them. Because once a car gets past a tipping point it is cheaper to change it. This is about the people who have some cherished old classic they take out on a Sunday. The ones on car forums talking about it. The ones who can afford that kind of hobby vehicle and the cost of keeping it running. Not the poor.
ETA if I were running London Tories, I might wonder what other London-wide issues could there be that do not involve taking on the Conservative government? It can't be water.
0 -
Absolutely astonishingly brilliant result for the Tories in Cambridge.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
Cambridge, a city which voted for Corbyn and overwhelmingly Remain and has a Labour council and had 0 Tory councillors until yesterday has just elected a Tory councillor in a by election in 1 ward. What is more the Tory voteshare was actually up.
Clear the congestion charge as unpopular in Cambridge as outer London!1 -
Agreed. For a long time I thought not, it's a tough ask, but they have not recovered, there's plenty more bad news to come, they are riven by party infighting, have given up on making policy and engage solely in gimmicks, are failing in their targets, and the public seek very ready to be tactical.Peter_the_Punter said:
When I looked at Electoral Calculus yesterday I was a bit dismissive of their suggestion the Tories could be down to 100 seats, until I started looking at those 100. They contained several that on closer inspection might easily go. My own constituency of Tewkesbury is one, where incumbent Laurence Robertson is fighting off a local scandal and the LDs did very well at the May elections.Heathener said:Morning all and @MikeSmithson I hope you are continuing to make a good recovery.
This betting is remarkable really. If the tories do lose all 4 (3) then it's going to create the media meme going into the election home straight. These are no longer mid-terms. There are two GE election options: Spring (May/June) or Autumn (October). So we're either 10 months away from the election or 15 months away.
Somerton & Frome I totally get, but would still be a stellar LibDem result. It's Selby & Ainsty that would really send shockwaves through the Conservative Party.
You could easily identify other similar 'outliers'.
I really do think an extraordinary result could be on the cards.
Estimates should be at the lower end of expectations.0 -
Thatcher was less centrist than Callaghan in 1979 and won.algarkirk said:
In the Brexit election - whether 2017 or 2019 is meant - the party that didn't actually lose (2017) and the party who won (2019) was the more centrist of the only two options for leading a government.Heathener said:
If they do lose the GE, and by a sizeable amount, there's going to be all hell breaking loose within the Party. It will be as acrimonious as anything seen on the Labour side in their own wilderness years.Cicero said:When even their own side thinks that the Tories would benefit from a spell of rest and recuperation in opposition, it is hard to argue positively that any by election can be safe for them.
Also first, I guess.
I predict the Party will have one more lurch to the nasty right, embracing someone like Badenoch, who will then lose the next General Election comprehensively.
Only then will the Party come to its senses and realise that (barring the one exception of the Brexit election), ALL General Elections in the UK are won by winning the centre. A factional party, be it of Left or Right, loses.
As you say, all elections are won from the centre. The only way Labour can now lose in 2024 is by voters losing faith in their competence (ie not as bad as the Tories) and believing that voting Labour is to vote for the broad left/Jezza alliance rather than for social democrats.
Wilson was less centrist than Heath in 1966 or 1974 and won.
Attlee was less centrist than Churchill in 1945 and 1950 and won.1 -
It'll come back in a bit. But the sustained lead and possibility of heavy tactical voting gives credence to the idea it won't come in enough.Sean_F said:Wilson, Callaghan, Major, Thatcher, Brown all saw their party’s vote share rise, in the run up to the election, despite massive unpopularity.
Nothing suggests to me that that basic rule will be altered in the run up to the next election.0 -
Councils dislike what government or other councils do all the time - that's what being local will mean sometimes.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It seems it had an effect in Cambridge and even labour's own candidate in Uxbridge contradicts KhanMexicanpete said:
It's not a war against cars.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
The expansion of ULEZ in London has been turned into what you describe as a "war against cars" by Conservative media shills like Nick Ferrari who considers it to be an erosion of personal freedom and an expansion of the nanny state. He goes on about it every day.
The percentage of vehicles that don't comply is now minimal. I keyed in my son's 2003 Mini Cooper S and an old 53 plate Fiesta we once owned and both were compliant. Fairly recent diesels are a different story but it wouldn't be too much trouble to exchange your ten year old diesel for an identical petrol equivalent with the scrappage allowance.
It is also a fact that very many ordinary workers depend on their cars and despite the idea there is a limited scrapage scheme available they simply do not have the means to change their car to avoid a £12.50 a day charge
Indeed it is not only conservative councils who are objecting, we are now seeing Labour ones as well0 -
I almost feel like Lab are a bit short for S&A - not strongly enough to put money on it though!
The Lab campaign has been, to my eyes, a bit narrow and limited and, while more visible on the ground than the Con campaign, similar in terms of leafletting etc. There is a constituency here for the Con culture war stuff and Brexit/sticking it to foreigners.
I suspect there are still more potential Con voters than Lab voters here, so it depends on whether the Con voters are motivated to actually vote and whether Lab can get out their vote plus tactical votes. It still feels to me a bit more evenly poised than the odds suggest.
Anecdotally, I know a number of Con-leaning people who won't vote Labour but who will either not vote or vote for minor parties/independents. If there's a widespread Con voter strike then they're toast, right enough.0 -
From the BBC website:
"Hannah Ingram-Moore is the youngest of Capt Sir Tom's two daughters"
FFS.
YOUNGER of two.2 -
The BBC: where people too illiterate for the DfE work as subeditors.SandyRentool said:From the BBC website:
"Hannah Ingram-Moore is the youngest of Capt Sir Tom's two daughters"
FFS.
YOUNGER of two.2 -
The mammals were less centrist than the dinosaurs in 65 Myr BP and won. Just as relevant, and just as irrelevant, as your examples.HYUFD said:
Thatcher was less centrist than Callaghan in 1979 and won.algarkirk said:
In the Brexit election - whether 2017 or 2019 is meant - the party that didn't actually lose (2017) and the party who won (2019) was the more centrist of the only two options for leading a government.Heathener said:
If they do lose the GE, and by a sizeable amount, there's going to be all hell breaking loose within the Party. It will be as acrimonious as anything seen on the Labour side in their own wilderness years.Cicero said:When even their own side thinks that the Tories would benefit from a spell of rest and recuperation in opposition, it is hard to argue positively that any by election can be safe for them.
Also first, I guess.
I predict the Party will have one more lurch to the nasty right, embracing someone like Badenoch, who will then lose the next General Election comprehensively.
Only then will the Party come to its senses and realise that (barring the one exception of the Brexit election), ALL General Elections in the UK are won by winning the centre. A factional party, be it of Left or Right, loses.
As you say, all elections are won from the centre. The only way Labour can now lose in 2024 is by voters losing faith in their competence (ie not as bad as the Tories) and believing that voting Labour is to vote for the broad left/Jezza alliance rather than for social democrats.
Wilson was less centrist than Heath in 1966 or 1974 and won.
Attlee was less centrist than Churchill in 1945 and 1950 and won.1 -
Is that net gains? Bearing in mind it's very possible they will lose some of the seats they've taken at by-elections.kjh said:
So do I, but I suspect that is wishful thinking on my part as I want the LDs to do well. I expect Labour to do very well, but for a complete slaughter the LDs need to do well in the blue wall seats. I am concerned that what might happen here is the Lab vote might be boosted leaving the seats as Tory holds. The LDs need to get their poll rating up still so that blue wall voters believe they are the challengers.Peter_the_Punter said:
When I looked at Electoral Calculus yesterday I was a bit dismissive of their suggestion the Tories could be down to 100 seats, until I started looking at those 100. They contained several that on closer inspection might easily go. My own constituency of Tewkesbury is one, where incumbent Laurence Robertson is fighting off a local scandal and the LDs did very well at the May elections.Heathener said:Morning all and @MikeSmithson I hope you are continuing to make a good recovery.
This betting is remarkable really. If the tories do lose all 4 (3) then it's going to create the media meme going into the election home straight. These are no longer mid-terms. There are two GE election options: Spring (May/June) or Autumn (October). So we're either 10 months away from the election or 15 months away.
Somerton & Frome I totally get, but would still be a stellar LibDem result. It's Selby & Ainsty that would really send shockwaves through the Conservative Party.
You could easily identify other similar 'outliers'.
I really do think an extraordinary result could be on the cards.
Polls like that Mid Beds poll don't help as that will split the vote so I wouldn't be surprised in seeing Tories putting out misinformation about the Lab threat in these seats as per the Telegraph.
Currently I wouldn't be surprised if the LDs make just 10 gains, but could easily make 50 gains.0 -
You do seem extremely agitated, annoyed, and intemperate this morning following my posting of Election Maps reporting on the conservative win in Cambridge yesterday due to their objection to congestion charging in the City and also the about turn of the Uxbridge labour candidateRochdalePioneers said:
The guy in Uxbridge wants to win his byelection and is triangulating. Good for him! And then he will back Khan because he'll be a London MP knowing where the power sits in the regional party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You say it is not a lot of cars - do you have a link ?RochdalePioneers said:
They won't pay £2k a year to go to work - they'll change the car. As has been discussed it isn't a lot of carsSandpit said:
People on minimum wage jobs, as well as key service workers such as nurses and care assistants, perhaps single mothers with kids in different schools are wondering if they can afford a £2k per year tax on going to work.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
Usually one might expect Labour to stand up for these people, no? Instead with get this reactionary hyperbole that makes no sense.
On your actual point, no, paying £12.50 to the mayor doesn’t reduce pollution. It does raise money though. Big bonus for all the out-of-towners without a vote, who get caught up and unwittingly fined. Great for the car plate closers too, not so much for the millions of innocents dragged into court for that over the years.
And you ignore the real concern of the labour candidate in Uxbridge who I am certain is more aware of the position in his constituency than you are to be fair
Again, if the Tories are genuinely concerned about the budgets of the poorest, why are they so unconcerned on every other measure?
This isn't about the poor. Its about the rich. Because if a 20 year old Mini is compliant then practically any old banger which could be used as a daily driver is. Note - Daily Driver. I keep being told the poor will be taxed £2k a day to go to work. Driving what? Do you know how much it costs to keep something truly ancient in use as a daily driver?
This is NOT about them. Because once a car gets past a tipping point it is cheaper to change it. This is about the people who have some cherished old classic they take out on a Sunday. The ones on car forums talking about it. The ones who can afford that kind of hobby vehicle and the cost of keeping it running. Not the poor.
You are relatively comfortably of, run a Tesla, and live in a lovely but sparsely populated area of the North East Scotland and it is easy for you to dismiss the problems of some car owners in the Greater London area but it does seem to be an issue and of course it is being challenged in the courts
I would also comment that it is labour councils who are also objecting to the plans
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-surrey-644966682 -
We had that. A councillor living in the Dominican Republic. Eventually he resigned.sbjme19 said:Is Dorries actually doing any constituency work or is she like one of those councillors who move, sometimes abroad, but carry on claiming allowances?
1 -
In Jane Austen's 'Emma', Mr Woodhouse has two daughters, and Emma is, more than once, described as 'the youngest'.SandyRentool said:From the BBC website:
"Hannah Ingram-Moore is the youngest of Capt Sir Tom's two daughters"
FFS.
YOUNGER of two.
(BTW in hard times re-reading 'Emma' is either the greater or greatest of therapies.)
4 -
NEW: YouGov approval ratings show that Corbyn is now the most popular current / former Labour leader, beating Starmer and Blair.
⚪️ Corbyn 30% (+11)
🔴 Starmer 29% (-2)
🔴 Brown 27% (-2)
🔴 Blair 24% (-4)
🔴 Miliband 21% (+2)
Via
@YouGov
, Apr-Jun 2023 (+/- vs Jan-Mar)0 -
There also appears to be a Labour in-fighting issue at play here, and voters never like being asked to vote again two months after they have just voted:HYUFD said:
Absolutely astonishingly brilliant result for the Tories in Cambridge.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
Cambridge, a city which voted for Corbyn and overwhelmingly Remain and has a Labour council and had 0 Tory councillors until yesterday has just elected a Tory councillor in a by election in 1 ward. What is more the Tory voteshare was actually up.
Clear the congestion charge as unpopular in Cambridge as outer London!
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/cambridge-labour-councillor-quits-just-26917734
The Tory candidate actually got fewer votes than he did in May but the Labour vote was down a lot more of course.0 -
Austen and Trollope, ISTR, found a new popularity during WW2.algarkirk said:
In Jane Austen's 'Emma', Mr Woodhouse has two daughters, and Emma is, more than once, described as 'the youngest'.SandyRentool said:From the BBC website:
"Hannah Ingram-Moore is the youngest of Capt Sir Tom's two daughters"
FFS.
YOUNGER of two.
(BTW in hard times re-reading 'Emma' is either the greater or greatest of therapies.)0 -
1
-
I do wonder if this is the end of the Tory Party. I know it is the longest surviving continual political party, and therefore people like to think it has a special set of skills that will allow it to be immortal, but that's like saying "My nan is 103, so she can't possibly die as she's so good at not dying". No political party survives forever, and the death of political parties can be good and useful things - I think if the Tories really lost a lot of seats and really put someone like Badenoch in charge, it would have to split and the more centrist Tories would become a "Wet" party and the more right wing Tories would become a more UKippy party. That could also allow Labour to finally split (like it needs to), creating a neoliberal centrist party under Starmer and a real workers party to the left of it. LDs and Greens would still fit in that dynamic, but the Wets and Neolibs would fight more for LD voters and the workers party and the Greens would fight on the left.Heathener said:
If they do lose the GE, and by a sizeable amount, there's going to be all hell breaking loose within the Party. It will be as acrimonious as anything seen on the Labour side in their own wilderness years.Cicero said:When even their own side thinks that the Tories would benefit from a spell of rest and recuperation in opposition, it is hard to argue positively that any by election can be safe for them.
Also first, I guess.
I predict the Party will have one more lurch to the nasty right, embracing someone like Badenoch, who will then lose the next General Election comprehensively.
Only then will the Party come to its senses and realise that (barring the one exception of the Brexit election), ALL General Elections in the UK are won by winning the centre. A factional party, be it of Left or Right, loses.0 -
Neither Labour nor the Tories would split under FPTP, under PR very possibly but not the current voting system148grss said:
I do wonder if this is the end of the Tory Party. I know it is the longest surviving continual political party, and therefore people like to think it has a special set of skills that will allow it to be immortal, but that's like saying "My nan is 103, so she can't possibly die as she's so good at not dying". No political party survives forever, and the death of political parties can be good and useful things - I think if the Tories really lost a lot of seats and really put someone like Badenoch in charge, it would have to split and the more centrist Tories would become a "Wet" party and the more right wing Tories would become a more UKippy party. That could also allow Labour to finally split (like it needs to), creating a neoliberal centrist party under Starmer and a real workers party to the left of it. LDs and Greens would still fit in that dynamic, but the Wets and Neolibs would fight more for LD voters and the workers party and the Greens would fight on the left.Heathener said:
If they do lose the GE, and by a sizeable amount, there's going to be all hell breaking loose within the Party. It will be as acrimonious as anything seen on the Labour side in their own wilderness years.Cicero said:When even their own side thinks that the Tories would benefit from a spell of rest and recuperation in opposition, it is hard to argue positively that any by election can be safe for them.
Also first, I guess.
I predict the Party will have one more lurch to the nasty right, embracing someone like Badenoch, who will then lose the next General Election comprehensively.
Only then will the Party come to its senses and realise that (barring the one exception of the Brexit election), ALL General Elections in the UK are won by winning the centre. A factional party, be it of Left or Right, loses.3 -
You have seen the climate change news yesterday? And you have grandchildren. Who are, I hope, lucky not to live in areas affected by traffic fumes.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You do seem extremely agitated, annoyed, and intemperate this morning following my posting of Election Maps reporting on the conservative win in Cambridge yesterday due to their objection to congestion charging in the City and also the about turn of the Uxbridge labour candidateRochdalePioneers said:
The guy in Uxbridge wants to win his byelection and is triangulating. Good for him! And then he will back Khan because he'll be a London MP knowing where the power sits in the regional party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You say it is not a lot of cars - do you have a link ?RochdalePioneers said:
They won't pay £2k a year to go to work - they'll change the car. As has been discussed it isn't a lot of carsSandpit said:
People on minimum wage jobs, as well as key service workers such as nurses and care assistants, perhaps single mothers with kids in different schools are wondering if they can afford a £2k per year tax on going to work.RochdalePioneers said:
What do we want? MORE POLLUTION! When do we want it? NOW!Sandpit said:
Khan’s team were in the High Court yesterday, he’s being sued by five councils affected by the ULEZ expansion, who claim the consultation was inadequate and incomprehensible, with no enabling legislation passed, but as the equivalent of a order-in-council based on the original legislation for a much smaller zone.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good morning
Interesting developments overnight, each seemingly as a consequence of the war against cars meeting political reality.
No 1
Cambridge City Council elects a Conservative for the first time since 2012! The Conservative's fought this by-election on a platform of scrapping the city's proposed congestion charge - Labour, LDs & Greens all said they would reform, not scrap it.
King's Hedges (Cambridge) Council By-Election Result:
CON: 34.9% (+3.0) LAB: 33.6% (-5.6) LDM: 23.5% (+8.5) GRN: 8.0% (-6.0)
Conservative GAIN from Labour. Changes w/ 2023.
No 2
The labour candidate in Uxbridge, Danny Beales, openly attacks Khan’s ULEZ as an indication that this could be having an effect on his campaign.
https://news.sky.com/story/labour-split-as-partys-candidate-in-uxbridge-by-election-speaks-out-against-london-mayors-ulez-expansion-12915004
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12262955/Sadiq-Khan-lacks-legal-power-order-ULEZ-expansion-High-Court-hears.html
Tories in London really need to get everyone running on this as a single issue campaign. Who’s their Londoner version of Andy Street?
There’s also a civil liberties group trying to sue the mayor, on the basis of the increased surveillance and ANPR cameras resulting from the scheme.
What do we want? OUR KIDS WITH ASTHMA! When do we want it! NOW!
Some morons are upset about having to upgrade their ancient car. More people are upset by the reality that you can taste the particulates spewed out of exhaust pipes and it is having a truly detrimental effect on people's health.
Usually one might expect Labour to stand up for these people, no? Instead with get this reactionary hyperbole that makes no sense.
On your actual point, no, paying £12.50 to the mayor doesn’t reduce pollution. It does raise money though. Big bonus for all the out-of-towners without a vote, who get caught up and unwittingly fined. Great for the car plate closers too, not so much for the millions of innocents dragged into court for that over the years.
And you ignore the real concern of the labour candidate in Uxbridge who I am certain is more aware of the position in his constituency than you are to be fair
Again, if the Tories are genuinely concerned about the budgets of the poorest, why are they so unconcerned on every other measure?
This isn't about the poor. Its about the rich. Because if a 20 year old Mini is compliant then practically any old banger which could be used as a daily driver is. Note - Daily Driver. I keep being told the poor will be taxed £2k a day to go to work. Driving what? Do you know how much it costs to keep something truly ancient in use as a daily driver?
This is NOT about them. Because once a car gets past a tipping point it is cheaper to change it. This is about the people who have some cherished old classic they take out on a Sunday. The ones on car forums talking about it. The ones who can afford that kind of hobby vehicle and the cost of keeping it running. Not the poor.
You are relatively comfortably of, run a Tesla, and live in a lovely but sparsely populated area of the North East Scotland and it is easy for you to dismiss the problems of some car owners in the Greater London area but it does seem to be an issue and of course it is being challenged in the courts
I would also comment that it is labour councils who are also objecting to the plans
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-surrey-644966680 -
Now do the negative ratings toobigjohnowls said:NEW: YouGov approval ratings show that Corbyn is now the most popular current / former Labour leader, beating Starmer and Blair.
⚪️ Corbyn 30% (+11)
🔴 Starmer 29% (-2)
🔴 Brown 27% (-2)
🔴 Blair 24% (-4)
🔴 Miliband 21% (+2)
Via
@YouGov
, Apr-Jun 2023 (+/- vs Jan-Mar)2 -
Is that just amongst Labour supporters? Because I can imagine Corbyn's quite popular amongst Tories as well - for the 2019 majority!bigjohnowls said:NEW: YouGov approval ratings show that Corbyn is now the most popular current / former Labour leader, beating Starmer and Blair.
⚪️ Corbyn 30% (+11)
🔴 Starmer 29% (-2)
🔴 Brown 27% (-2)
🔴 Blair 24% (-4)
🔴 Miliband 21% (+2)
Via
@YouGov
, Apr-Jun 2023 (+/- vs Jan-Mar)
BTW, a while back I said that I thought that Corbyn was an anti-Semite (a view which has not changed). You then warned me that Corbyn's legal team (*) would be having words with me about it.
I have not had any legal letters about it. Is it therefore fine to say that I think Corbyn's an anti-Semite?
Because I think Corbyn's an anti-Semite.
(*) All paid for by Corbyn himself, of course, and not 'donations'...0 -
Ah nice to see you BJO.bigjohnowls said:NEW: YouGov approval ratings show that Corbyn is now the most popular current / former Labour leader, beating Starmer and Blair.
⚪️ Corbyn 30% (+11)
🔴 Starmer 29% (-2)
🔴 Brown 27% (-2)
🔴 Blair 24% (-4)
🔴 Miliband 21% (+2)
Via
@YouGov
, Apr-Jun 2023 (+/- vs Jan-Mar)
We don't see so much of you these days, but then if you will restrict yourself to only posting when Starmer's Labour get an adverse poll...1
