grufty jim
|
Re: Congestion Charging
Feb 28, 2003, 13:39
|
Not a bit of it. Norris is the motorist's friend. Didn't he hold a top position in the Road Hauliers Association or some such?
He's the only serious challenge to Ken - i can't see NuLabour putting up a candidate that anyone takes seriously. And what a disaster for Londoners if Norris (friend to big-business) gets in. I doubt i'll still be living in London come the next mayoral election, but i really do think that Ken is the best man for the job, and one of a handful of politicians in the country that i have any respect for.
Here endeth the (non-)party political broadcast.
|
Lord Lucan
|
Re: Congestion Charging
Feb 28, 2003, 14:56
|
|
Cool! You've turned into the office troll.
|
anthonyqkiernan
|
Re: Congestion Charging
Feb 28, 2003, 15:02
|
|
Can you not just leave by the IN bit. Or, is that a sackable offence.
|
Merrick
|
Steven Norris
Feb 28, 2003, 22:35
|
Norris was the Roads Minister at the time the DoT approved the Newbury Bypass.
He didn't disagree with the bypass at all. Until it came to the run up to the 1997 election where he'd decided to stand down. Then he publically said that the DoT knw their traffic calculations for Newbury were wrong. On BBC TV, he stod on the route of the Newbury Bypass (then under construction) and said 'the protesters were right, and they were right from the first. There was no need to build this road. We could have left all this countryside intact'.
He admitted to *knowing* he was wrong and still pushing ahead!
After the election, he immediatley got a high-paid low-work position with the Road Haulage Association (a federation of truck transport companies, big campaginers for more roads and less fuel tax).
I met him in 1997 when he was on Sky TV debating the roads issue with a friend. He said something about how people shouldn't be protesting while claiming benefits.
After the show I got to talk to him and pointed out that we were doing what quangos like English Nature should be doing, but we were a lot more effective and a lot cheaper, and given that there were going to be several million people unemployed, it might as well be the ones who do something useful with their time.
He said it was all good points and he broadly agreed. Regarding benefits, he said 'I couldn't care less, but you've got to say this kind of thing when you're on television'.
He's a fucking twat, a road building twat. Whenever you see him on TV, ignore what he says and just chant 'lying road building twat, lying road building twat' till he's finished. Works for me, like.
|
Merrick
|
Re: Congestion Charging
Feb 28, 2003, 22:46
|
As cookie says, it'd be nice if they did do that kind of name and shame thing, but we all know that's not going to happen.
There are a number of vehicles that the police like to keep tabs on.
In the 80s the New Statesman did a feature on corrupt coppers and, as part of their investigation, paid a bent copper to get them the owenr details of some vehicle registrations. They used ones from the staff at New Stateman.
What came back was more than they expected - the editors car was on a list that was an adjunct to the Stolen Vehicles Register; a watched cars list that, whenever the number was checked in, it was logged where and when it was seen. The state was watching the guy for being a prminent lefty writer.
Such a list must still exist (why would they have scrapped it?), and we have to wonder who else is on it. The new cameras will automate the logging, making it much more complete, and able to handle many more vehicles.
And it ain't just the CC camers - the new genration speed cameras (the blue ones) log you at two points on the road, and if you did the distance in to short a time they send you a ticket. Vehicle identification cameras that radio out the info - can *you* think of a secondary use for that?
A friend of mine was stopped in Leeds last week cos the cameras had clocked thier van, and it is registered as white but has since been painted blue. The cameras told the cops, the cops pulled the van within minutes.
So it's not 'paranoia' about this stuff jim, it's actually what's happening.
The stopping of some vehicle use might be some consolation, but it's no justification for it.
In the same way, concern about urban pedestrian CCTV might make some people stop using shopping malls and use their local shops instead - that doesn't make me cheer it on or not mind that it is being used for state surveillance of 'subversive' people.
|
grufty jim
|
Re: Steven Norris
Mar 01, 2003, 13:15
|
Whatever you say about Norris, i was always under the impression that he was a good politician (with all the slimey connotations that has). That he'd say anything (however far from his beliefs) in order to secure or maintain power.
However, he has announced that a central plank of his mayoral campaign will be to scrap the congestion charge. Apparently it's a "silly" scheme; is "technically flawed"; and "doesn't work".
Now, i'm sure there are some technical glitches. However there appear to be far fewer than even the proponents of the scheme expected.
I don't know anyone who thinks it's "silly" other than Norris. Plenty of folks disagree with it; but who really thinks it's "silly" to try *something* to reduce traffic?
Most importantly of all, however, is that it does actually appear to be working. Traffic jams in London have been dramatically reduced, "higher than usual" numbers of cyclists have been recorded on the streets. The extra buses put on by the mayor are all full (and there's plans to add yet more with the first chunk of revenue from CC). The success of the scheme has apparently opened a major line of credit for Transport For London, who will be allowed to borrow against future CC revenue (vital if the tube system is to see increased capacity). And interestingly, NuLabour (after years of condemning the scheme) have hailed it as a success, and plan to roll it out across the country assuming it works over a longer term (Mr. Darling is looking to try and snatch some of the credit for a scheme he refused to back, the git).
Ken Livingstone pledged to make London a better place to live when he ran for mayor. This scheme on it's own would appear to be fulfilling that pledge.
I say we organise a whip-round and buy him a particularly nice newt. Yay to Ken!
|
