|
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
wrote:
In article -septembe r.org, (Recliner) wrote: Quote: The government was today accused of _dragging its feet while Londoners choke_ on toxic air. Campaign group ClientEarth launched the attack on ministers on the first anniversary of its Supreme Court victory which forced the Government to beef up its masterplan to tackle nitrogen dioxide pollution. The environmental lawyers also published a list of 20 pollution blackspots where filthy air far exceeds EU limits. They include Putney High Street, in south west London, where the average NO2 concentration level was 133 micrograms per cubic metre between January 1 and April 27, according to monitoring by King_s College London, with EU regulations saying this score should not be more than 40. It's been a terrible pollution blackspot all my life. Never did me any harm in the 1960s G. What could be done about it though? It's a main approach to a Thames bridge that is also the main local shopping street. Dig a tunnel? Knock all the shops and nearby houses down and create a bigger Exchange shopping centre away from the road? It's hardly going to be practical to sharply reduce the traffic on the high Street is it? The answer is much cleaner, not necessarily fewer, vehicles. In particular, we now know that diesels are much dirtier than previously understood (and, yes, I do have a diesel car, but my next one won't be). The day is approaching when only zero emissions vehicles will be allowed in the most congested areas, or there will be hefty pollution charges on dirty vehicles. I know they're not necessarily cleaner overall, but EVs are much better for local pollution. Of course, power generation also needs to be cleaner, which is happening as the old coal stations close. Brixton Road in Lambeth had an average reading so far this year of 128. While Euston Road in Camden, Marylebone Road in Westminster, and Earls Court Road in Kensington and Chelsea were all on 86. Continues, with map: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...s-for-toxic-ai r-in-london-a3236611.html |
Quote:
Stop preventing traffic from moving. By far the biggest reason air quality in London has deteriorated so much since we've had a Mayor is that both Mayors and TfL - with the enthusiastic support of some anti-motor car local authorities - have done everything they can to frustrate motorists. The evidence of/for this is overwhelming. Oxford Street, where car owners are banned until after 19.00 hours has the worst air pollution, and this cannot be blamed on private motorists. TfL has boasted repeatedly that the "congestion charge" had reduced the number of cars in Central London, yet air pollution is far worse than twenty years ago. The basic logic is bone simple. A car exhaust emits fumes from the moment the engine is switched on until the moment it is switched off. Therefore, the longer the engine is running, the worse its affect on air quality. If the powers-that-be change roads in such a way that car journeys last longer, car engines will be running longer and there will be more air pollution. I note with utter contempt that none of the fashion-following major candidates for Mayor has mentioned this elementary point although they all pretend to be concerned about air quality. Clearly some alleviation of the damage done by past and future Mayors and TfL can be achieved by cleaner vehicles, particularly hybrids and all-electric cars. But anyone genuinely interested in tackling London's very serious air problem - as opposed to to pretending to be - must start by changing the roads back to how they were 16 years ago. |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
Robin9 wrote:
;155394 Wrote: In article nal-septembe r.org, (Recliner) wrote: - Quote: The government was today accused of _dragging its feet while Londoners choke_ on toxic air. Campaign group ClientEarth launched the attack on ministers on the first anniversary of its Supreme Court victory which forced the Government to beef up its masterplan to tackle nitrogen dioxide pollution. The environmental lawyers also published a list of 20 pollution blackspots where filthy air far exceeds EU limits. They include Putney High Street, in south west London, where the average NO2 concentration level was 133 micrograms per cubic metre between January 1 and April 27, according to monitoring by King_s College London, with EU regulations saying this score should not be more than 40.- It's been a terrible pollution blackspot all my life. Never did me any harm in the 1960s G. What could be done about it though? It's a main approach to a Thames bridge that is also the main local shopping street. Dig a tunnel? Knock all the shops and nearby houses down and create a bigger Exchange shopping centre away from the road? It's hardly going to be practical to sharply reduce the traffic on the high Street is it? - Brixton Road in Lambeth had an average reading so far this year of 128. While Euston Road in Camden, Marylebone Road in Westminster, and Earls Court Road in Kensington and Chelsea were all on 86. Continues, with map: - http://tinyurl.com/jz83aw3 r-in-london-a3236611.html I imagine most "regulars" here can predict what my opinion is. Stop preventing traffic from moving. By far the biggest reason air quality in London has deteriorated so much since we've had a Mayor is that both Mayors and TfL - with the enthusiastic support of some anti-motor car local authorities - have done everything they can to frustrate motorists. The evidence of/for this is overwhelming. Oxford Street, where car owners are banned until after 19.00 hours has the worst air pollution, and this cannot be blamed on private motorists. No, but it's full of idling diesel buses and taxis. And it's actually neither the worst spot, nor getting worse: "Oxford Street had a level of 104, which was a fall from 135 last year. Experts believe this is significantly due to the use of cleaner buses, including more operating in electric mode." TfL has boasted repeatedly that the "congestion charge" had reduced the number of cars in Central London, yet air pollution is far worse than twenty years ago. Is it? I think we're much more aware of it now, but the actual levels are probably less than then. I used to drive into London regularly in the period up to the mid-1990s, and the smog was worse then than now. The basic logic is bone simple. A car exhaust emits fumes from the moment the engine is switched on until the moment it is switched off. That's not true of the increasing number of stop-start cars, nor hybrids or EVs. So the problem is reducing. Therefore, the longer the engine is running, the worse its affect on air quality. If the powers-that-be change roads in such a way that car journeys last longer, car engines will be running longer and there will be more air pollution. The big cause of urban pollution is diesel engines, whether in buses, taxis, vans or cars. So you could blame Gordon Brown for changing the VED system to favour diesel vehicles. I note with utter contempt that none of the fashion-following major candidates for Mayor has mentioned this elementary point although they all pretend to be concerned about air quality. Clearly some alleviation of the damage done by past and future Mayors and TfL can be achieved by cleaner vehicles, particularly hybrids and all-electric cars. But anyone genuinely interested in tackling London's very serious air problem - as opposed to to pretending to be - must start by changing the roads back to how they were 16 years ago. I don't think the cycle 'superhighways' will be painted over, so the loss of traffic lanes is permanent. And surely those cyclists will contribute more to cleaner air than the same lanes full of even free-flowing traffic. |
Quote:
but you won't hear any politician, least of all the current Mayoral candidates admit that. They all harp on about the need to stop people using their cars as a means of reducing air pollution. Hybrid vehicles do not emit fumes when stationary or when cruising gently but they do when being driven uphill or without skill. So lengthening their journeys by closing roads or making left or right turns illegal still increases the amount of fumes they emit. Incidentally, another point our beloved politicians are blind to is the fact that most minicab's in Central London are hybrids, and so contribute less to air pollution than most other vehicles. Certainly diesel vehicles are the second biggest culprit; and has any politician mentioned taxis in this regard? We have a Mayor who commissioned a new bus design - which wasn't any good anyway: well done Boris, another ludicrous failure - but has not realised that a new design for a hybrid taxi is far more relevant to London's requirements. Any Mayor who was serious about reducing air pollution would open discussions with firms like Toyota. There is no prospect of the cycles super highways being changed in the immediate future but in the long run, they will probably be eliminated. There are fashions in politics, and political fashions are as trivial and silly as fashions in clothing or pop music. Already many people are saying the cycle super highways are a disaster, and in time more and more people will realise that allocating half of the most important roads to a small minority of unpopular people does not make sense. Sooner or later, Ukip are going to wake up and realise that they can win the Mayoral election if they come out and state boldly that the current policies are idiotic. I'm surprised it hasn't yet dawned on them that they ought to campaign on behalf of motorists. |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
Robin9 wrote:
'Recliner[_3_ Wrote: ;155403']Robin9 wrote:- ;155394 Wrote: - In article nal-septembe r.org, (Recliner) wrote: - Quote: The government was today accused of _dragging its feet while Londoners choke_ on toxic air. Campaign group ClientEarth launched the attack on ministers on the first anniversary of its Supreme Court victory which forced the Government to beef up its masterplan to tackle nitrogen dioxide pollution. The environmental lawyers also published a list of 20 pollution blackspots where filthy air far exceeds EU limits. They include Putney High Street, in south west London, where the average NO2 concentration level was 133 micrograms per cubic metre between January 1 and April 27, according to monitoring by King_s College London, with EU regulations saying this score should not be more than 40.- It's been a terrible pollution blackspot all my life. Never did me any harm in the 1960s G. What could be done about it though? It's a main approach to a Thames bridge that is also the main local shopping street. Dig a tunnel? Knock all the shops and nearby houses down and create a bigger Exchange shopping centre away from the road? It's hardly going to be practical to sharply reduce the traffic on the high Street is it? - Brixton Road in Lambeth had an average reading so far this year of 128. While Euston Road in Camden, Marylebone Road in Westminster, and Earls Court Road in Kensington and Chelsea were all on 86. Continues, with map: - http://tinyurl.com/jz83aw3 r-in-london-a3236611.html - I imagine most "regulars" here can predict what my opinion is. Stop preventing traffic from moving. By far the biggest reason air quality in London has deteriorated so much since we've had a Mayor is that both Mayors and TfL - with the enthusiastic support of some anti-motor car local authorities - have done everything they can to frustrate motorists. The evidence of/for this is overwhelming. Oxford Street, where car owners are banned until after 19.00 hours has the worst air pollution, and this cannot be blamed on private motorists. - No, but it's full of idling diesel buses and taxis. And it's actually neither the worst spot, nor getting worse: "Oxford Street had a level of 104, which was a fall from 135 last year. Experts believe this is significantly due to the use of cleaner buses, including more operating in electric mode." - TfL has boasted repeatedly that the "congestion charge" had reduced the number of cars in Central London, yet air pollution is far worse than twenty years ago.- Is it? I think we're much more aware of it now, but the actual levels are probably less than then. I used to drive into London regularly in the period up to the mid-1990s, and the smog was worse then than now. - The basic logic is bone simple. A car exhaust emits fumes from the moment the engine is switched on until the moment it is switched off. - That's not true of the increasing number of stop-start cars, nor hybrids or EVs. So the problem is reducing. - Therefore, the longer the engine is running, the worse its affect on air quality. If the powers-that-be change roads in such a way that car journeys last longer, car engines will be running longer and there will be more air pollution.- The big cause of urban pollution is diesel engines, whether in buses, taxis, vans or cars. So you could blame Gordon Brown for changing the VED system to favour diesel vehicles. - I note with utter contempt that none of the fashion-following major candidates for Mayor has mentioned this elementary point although they all pretend to be concerned about air quality. Clearly some alleviation of the damage done by past and future Mayors and TfL can be achieved by cleaner vehicles, particularly hybrids and all-electric cars. But anyone genuinely interested in tackling London's very serious air problem - as opposed to to pretending to be - must start by changing the roads back to how they were 16 years ago.- I don't think the cycle 'superhighways' will be painted over, so the loss of traffic lanes is permanent. And surely those cyclists will contribute more to cleaner air than the same lanes full of even free-flowing traffic. So, we both agree that part of the problem is buses and taxis, but you won't hear any politician, least of all the current Mayoral candidates admit that. They all harp on about the need to stop people using their cars as a means of reducing air pollution. Hybrid vehicles do not emit fumes when stationary or when cruising gently but they do when being driven uphill or without skill. So lengthening their journeys by closing roads or making left or right turns illegal still increases the amount of fumes they emit. Incidentally, another point our beloved politicians are blind to is the fact that most minicab's in Central London are hybrids, and so contribute less to air pollution than most other vehicles. Certainly diesel vehicles are the second biggest culprit; and has any politician mentioned taxis in this regard? We have a Mayor who commissioned a new bus design - which wasn't any good anyway: well done Boris, another ludicrous failure - but has not realised that a new design for a hybrid taxi is far more relevant to London's requirements. Any Mayor who was serious about reducing air pollution would open discussions with firms like Toyota. Haven't you heard about the new TX5? http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-new...k-cab-revealed Why does the mayor need to open discussions with Toyota? It's perfectly capable of seeing the opportunities for itself: http://blog.toyota.co.uk/toyotas-cab...he-london-look There is no prospect of the cycles super highways being changed in the immediate future but in the long run, they will probably be eliminated. There are fashions in politics, and political fashions are as trivial and silly as fashions in clothing or pop music. Already many people are saying the cycle super highways are a disaster, and in time more and more people will realise that allocating half of the most important roads to a small minority of unpopular people does not make sense. I suspect that, in reality, more roads will be closed to IC-engined cars. The day is fast approaching when most taxis and buses will be hybrids or EVs, and there will probably be a ban on diesel vehicles in central London. And there will be more roads where there won't be any lanes for private cars, only for public transport, non-polluting taxis and, yes, cycles. Don't expect the war on motorists to end any time soon. Sooner or later, Ukip are going to wake up and realise that they can win the Mayoral election if they come out and state boldly that the current policies are idiotic. I'm surprised it hasn't yet dawned on them that they ought to campaign on behalf of motorists. The mayoral election is this week, and the UKIP candidate will be lucky to get 10% of the first preference votes. There probably won't be a UKIP by the time of the next mayoral election. After the June referendum, regardless of the result, what will be its point? |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
On 2016\05\02 22:55, Recliner wrote:
The mayoral election is this week, and the UKIP candidate will be lucky to get 10% of the first preference votes. There probably won't be a UKIP by the time of the next mayoral election. After the June referendum, regardless of the result, what will be its point? We polled 20% the other day. The Cons were on 30%, and Labour were on 33%. I don't see how you can write off a party that's so close to being first in the polls. |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2016\05\02 22:55, Recliner wrote: The mayoral election is this week, and the UKIP candidate will be lucky to get 10% of the first preference votes. There probably won't be a UKIP by the time of the next mayoral election. After the June referendum, regardless of the result, what will be its point? We polled 20% the other day. The Cons were on 30%, and Labour were on 33%. I don't see how you can write off a party that's so close to being first in the polls. The current polls show UKIP getting 7% first preference votes in the London mayoral election. It may, just, manage to come third, depending on how the Greens do. https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.ne...alPoll_W_2.pdf I'm not sure how coming a very distant third counts as "so close to being first". Is there any UK region where UKIP will come higher than third or fourth? After the 23rd of June, what will be the role of UKIP, assume it doesn't splinter into two or more fragments? Will the current parliamentary party and the current leader even be in the same party? Are they even on speaking terms? Even Farage is reported to want to wind it up as a political party, and turn it into a "movement". http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/663...ion-membership |
Quote:
would be much higher. I agree they will come nowhere in the current Mayoral election. |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
Robin9 wrote:
'Recliner[_3_ Wrote: ;155440']Robin9 wrote:- - Sooner or later, Ukip are going to wake up and realise that they can win the Mayoral election if they come out and state boldly that the current policies are idiotic. I'm surprised it hasn't yet dawned on them that they ought to campaign on behalf of motorists.- The mayoral election is this week, and the UKIP candidate will be lucky to get 10% of the first preference votes. There probably won't be a UKIP by the time of the next mayoral election. After the June referendum, regardless of the result, what will be its point? If Ukip had done as I suggest, their share of the vote would be much higher. I agree they will come nowhere in the current Mayoral election. It would be interesting to see how well a pro-motorist candidate did in the London mayoral elections. I don't see any on this year's list: https://www.londonelects.org.uk/im-v...o-you-can-vote UKIP has other baggage, so even if the UKIP candidate was pro-motorist, it would be overshadowed by other considerations that usually make UKIP do badly in London. It would be a better test if there was someone promoting those policies alone, and not the usual UKIP stuff. For example, Peter Whittle's manifesto has these policies: - End open borders and introduce an Australian style points system [What has this to do with the London mayor?] - Build more houses across London and ensure Londoners have priority in social housing [How?] - Scrap council translation services and reinvest the money into London's communities [I don't think this comes under the mayor] - Support police stop and search powers to help reduce knife crime and save young lives - Cut immigration and tax vacant foreign owned properties to reduce pressure on London's housing [I don't think these come under a London mayor] ----- So he's repeating familiar UKIP policies that aren't relevant to the mayor's powers, but not mentioning things that are, such as public transport investment, fares, roads, congestion charge, local pollution, taxis, planning permission for new tall buildings, council tax levels, cycling, etc. He also tells us nothing about why he would be qualified for the job. He's obviously not a serious candidate, any more than UKIP is a serious party. Compare his absent policies and cv with the much more specific, relevant manifesto pledges by the only two serious candidates: https://www.londonelects.org.uk/mayo...ate-sadiq-khan https://www.londonelects.org.uk/mayo...-zac-goldsmith Even other no-hopers at least have serious manifestos: https://www.londonelects.org.uk/mayo...roline-pidgeon https://www.londonelects.org.uk/mayo...ate-sian-berry |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
On 2016\05\03 02:00, Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote: On 2016\05\02 22:55, Recliner wrote: The mayoral election is this week, and the UKIP candidate will be lucky to get 10% of the first preference votes. There probably won't be a UKIP by the time of the next mayoral election. After the June referendum, regardless of the result, what will be its point? We polled 20% the other day. The Cons were on 30%, and Labour were on 33%. I don't see how you can write off a party that's so close to being first in the polls. The current polls show UKIP getting 7% first preference votes in the London mayoral election. It may, just, manage to come third, depending on how the Greens do. https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.ne...alPoll_W_2.pdf I'm not sure how coming a very distant third counts as "so close to being first". Is there any UK region where UKIP will come higher than third or fourth? After the 23rd of June, what will be the role of UKIP, assume it doesn't splinter into two or more fragments? Will the current parliamentary party and the current leader even be in the same party? Are they even on speaking terms? Even Farage is reported to want to wind it up as a political party, and turn it into a "movement". http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/663...ion-membership So Orville the Duck is running a political party now. http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/...ppe-520361.jpg |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
On Tue, 3 May 2016 11:57:36 +0100
Basil Jet wrote: On 2016\05\03 02:00, Recliner wrote: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/663...-online-moveme t-people-unhappy-EU-European-union-membership So Orville the Duck is running a political party now. http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/...ppe-520361.jpg Well, we've got 60 year old student running Labour and Tim Nice but Dim running the Tories. -- Spud |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
On Tue, 3 May 2016 11:10:43 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:
On Tue, 3 May 2016 11:57:36 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: On 2016\05\03 02:00, Recliner wrote: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/663...-online-moveme t-people-unhappy-EU-European-union-membership So Orville the Duck is running a political party now. http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/...ppe-520361.jpg Well, we've got 60 year old student running Labour and Tim Nice but Dim running the Tories. If only -- Corbyn is actually 66, but still fighting for student lefty causes. Here's a picture of him taken just this week, at a May Day rally (it was so convenient that he felt that the Labour Party was running smoothly enough at the moment that he could take time out to attend a rally with the Communist Party): http://cdn.timesofisrael.com/uploads.../000_A48CL.jpg |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 09:55:18PM -0000, Recliner wrote:
Robin9 wrote: Sooner or later, Ukip are going to wake up and realise that they can win the Mayoral election if they come out and state boldly that the current policies are idiotic. I'm surprised it hasn't yet dawned on them that they ought to campaign on behalf of motorists. The mayoral election is this week, and the UKIP candidate will be lucky to get 10% of the first preference votes. Because whoever it is hasn't bothered to do any campaigning, let alone tell anyone about any policies he has that differentiate himself from the other serious candidates and which lie within the mayor's powers. -- David Cantrell | semi-evolved ape-thing Safety tip: never strap firearms to a hamster |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
On Tue, 03 May 2016 13:17:37 +0100, David Cantrell
wrote: On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 09:55:18PM -0000, Recliner wrote: Robin9 wrote: Sooner or later, Ukip are going to wake up and realise that they can win the Mayoral election if they come out and state boldly that the current policies are idiotic. I'm surprised it hasn't yet dawned on them that they ought to campaign on behalf of motorists. The mayoral election is this week, and the UKIP candidate will be lucky to get 10% of the first preference votes. Because whoever it is hasn't bothered to do any campaigning, let alone tell anyone about any policies he has that differentiate himself from the other serious candidates and which lie within the mayor's powers. Yup. His 'manifesto' looks like it was put together in five minutes when he belatedly realised he had an opportunity for some free publicity. It looks like UKIP knew it had no chance in that election, and basically ignored it. In doing so, it's lost the chance to come a decent third, and will be among three minor (UKIP, LD, Green) parties each getting around five to ten percent of the vote |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
On Tue, 03 May 2016 12:43:08 +0100
Recliner wrote: On Tue, 3 May 2016 11:10:43 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: On Tue, 3 May 2016 11:57:36 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: On 2016\05\03 02:00, Recliner wrote: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/663...nd-online-move e t-people-unhappy-EU-European-union-membership So Orville the Duck is running a political party now. http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/...ppe-520361.jpg Well, we've got 60 year old student running Labour and Tim Nice but Dim running the Tories. If only -- Corbyn is actually 66, but still fighting for student lefty causes. Yup, and thats fine by me tbh. The longer he's at the helm the longer labour remains unelectable. Unfortunately the Tories are a bloody shambles at the moment and need a decent opposition the kick them into back line. -- Spud |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
"Recliner" wrote Sooner or later, Ukip are going to wake up and realise that they can win the Mayoral election if they come out and state boldly that the current policies are idiotic. I'm surprised it hasn't yet dawned on them that they ought to campaign on behalf of motorists. The mayoral election is this week, and the UKIP candidate will be lucky to get 10% of the first preference votes. There probably won't be a UKIP by the time of the next mayoral election. After the June referendum, regardless of the result, what will be its point? If Leave wins, since Leave haven't defined what Leave means there will be a two+ year row about whether (say) the "Like Switzerland" option is satisfactory followed by maybe another referendum with a split UKIP and resulting in no majority for any /one/ of the options offered. (Compare the poster here who voted to keep First Past the Post because he wanted something beyond the Alternate Vote). If Remain wins, the UKIP, henceforth the **** party, will carry on, collecting MEP expenses and telling supporters they were robbed. -- -- Mike D |
Quote:
UKIP candidate simply does not understand what London politics is about. |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
In article ,
(Recliner) wrote: On Tue, 3 May 2016 11:10:43 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: On Tue, 3 May 2016 11:57:36 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: On 2016\05\03 02:00, Recliner wrote: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/663...rand-online-mo vemet-people-unhappy-EU-European-union-membership So Orville the Duck is running a political party now. http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/...Beppe-520361.j pg Well, we've got 60 year old student running Labour and Tim Nice but Dim running the Tories. If only -- Corbyn is actually 66, but still fighting for student lefty causes. Here's a picture of him taken just this week, at a May Day rally (it was so convenient that he felt that the Labour Party was running smoothly enough at the moment that he could take time out to attend a rally with the Communist Party): http://cdn.timesofisrael.com/uploads.../000_A48CL.jpg Not just any old Communist Party but the CPGB - Marxist-Leninist. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
"Michael R N Dolbear" wrote in message ... "Recliner" wrote Sooner or later, Ukip are going to wake up and realise that they can win the Mayoral election if they come out and state boldly that the current policies are idiotic. I'm surprised it hasn't yet dawned on them that they ought to campaign on behalf of motorists. The mayoral election is this week, and the UKIP candidate will be lucky to get 10% of the first preference votes. There probably won't be a UKIP by the time of the next mayoral election. After the June referendum, regardless of the result, what will be its point? If Leave wins, since Leave haven't defined what Leave means there will be a two+ year row about whether (say) the "Like Switzerland" option is satisfactory followed by maybe another referendum with a split UKIP and resulting in no majority for any /one/ of the options offered. (Compare the poster here who voted to keep First Past the Post because he wanted something beyond the Alternate Vote). and the Australians who voted to keep the (British) Monarchy because they wanted complete separation. If Remain wins, the UKIP, henceforth the **** party, will carry on, collecting MEP expenses and telling supporters they were robbed. -- -- Mike D |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
On Tue, 03 May 2016 12:25:19 -0500
wrote: In article , (Recliner) wrote: On Tue, 3 May 2016 11:10:43 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: On Tue, 3 May 2016 11:57:36 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: On 2016\05\03 02:00, Recliner wrote: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/663...rand-online-mo vemet-people-unhappy-EU-European-union-membership So Orville the Duck is running a political party now. http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/...Beppe-520361.j pg Well, we've got 60 year old student running Labour and Tim Nice but Dim running the Tories. If only -- Corbyn is actually 66, but still fighting for student lefty causes. Here's a picture of him taken just this week, at a May Day rally (it was so convenient that he felt that the Labour Party was running smoothly enough at the moment that he could take time out to attend a rally with the Communist Party): http://cdn.timesofisrael.com/uploads.../000_A48CL.jpg Not just any old Communist Party but the CPGB - Marxist-Leninist. Its that the Judean Peoples Front or the Popular Peoples Front of Judea? :) -- Spud |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
In article , d () wrote:
On Tue, 03 May 2016 12:25:19 -0500 wrote: In article , (Recliner) wrote: On Tue, 3 May 2016 11:10:43 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: On Tue, 3 May 2016 11:57:36 +0100 Basil Jet wrote: On 2016\05\03 02:00, Recliner wrote: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/663...brand-online-m ovemet-people-unhappy-EU-European-union-membership So Orville the Duck is running a political party now. http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/...y/Beppe-520361. jpg Well, we've got 60 year old student running Labour and Tim Nice but Dim running the Tories. If only -- Corbyn is actually 66, but still fighting for student lefty causes. Here's a picture of him taken just this week, at a May Day rally (it was so convenient that he felt that the Labour Party was running smoothly enough at the moment that he could take time out to attend a rally with the Communist Party): http://cdn.timesofisrael.com/uploads.../000_A48CL.jpg Not just any old Communist Party but the CPGB - Marxist-Leninist. Its that the Judean Peoples Front or the Popular Peoples Front of Judea? :) Probably. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
On 03/05/2016 12:43, Recliner wrote: [...] If only -- Corbyn is actually 66, but still fighting for student lefty causes. Here's a picture of him taken just this week, at a May Day rally (it was so convenient that he felt that the Labour Party was running smoothly enough at the moment that he could take time out to attend a rally with the Communist Party): http://cdn.timesofisrael.com/uploads.../000_A48CL.jpg Nice bit of camera work there... one could almost take away the impression that it was a CPGB-ML rally, rather than them being one of the great many different groups that turned up that day. (I'm no particular Corbyn fan I should add.) |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
In article , (Mizter T) wrote:
On 03/05/2016 12:43, Recliner wrote: [...] If only -- Corbyn is actually 66, but still fighting for student lefty causes. Here's a picture of him taken just this week, at a May Day rally (it was so convenient that he felt that the Labour Party was running smoothly enough at the moment that he could take time out to attend a rally with the Communist Party): http://cdn.timesofisrael.com/uploads.../000_A48CL.jpg Nice bit of camera work there... one could almost take away the impression that it was a CPGB-ML rally, rather than them being one of the great many different groups that turned up that day. I kinda assumed that. If the CPGB-ML were there then so were loads of other Trots. (I'm no particular Corbyn fan I should add.) Neither am I. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 12:11:09PM -0500, wrote:
In article , (Mizter T) wrote: Nice bit of camera work there... one could almost take away the impression that it was a CPGB-ML rally, rather than them being one of the great many different groups that turned up that day. I kinda assumed that. If the CPGB-ML were there then so were loads of other Trots. And the Trots were probably out-numbered by non-Trots. (I'm no particular Corbyn fan I should add.) Neither am I. Nor am I. I voted a mixture of Lib Dem and Tory today and think that this non-story about him attending an event that some other people also attended is one of the stupidest things I've seen this year. -- David Cantrell | Pope | First Church of the Symmetrical Internet There are many different types of sausages. The best are from the north of England. The wurst are from Germany. -- seen in alt.2eggs... |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
On Thu, 05 May 2016 13:32:31 +0100, David Cantrell
wrote: On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 12:11:09PM -0500, wrote: In article , (Mizter T) wrote: Nice bit of camera work there... one could almost take away the impression that it was a CPGB-ML rally, rather than them being one of the great many different groups that turned up that day. I kinda assumed that. If the CPGB-ML were there then so were loads of other Trots. And the Trots were probably out-numbered by non-Trots. (I'm no particular Corbyn fan I should add.) Neither am I. Nor am I. I voted a mixture of Lib Dem and Tory today and think that this non-story about him attending an event that some other people also attended is one of the stupidest things I've seen this year. The point wasn't that he attended it, but that he felt that it was the right thing to do and the best use of his time, just before polling day, and with all the anti-Semitism rows going on in the Labour party. |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
Robin9 wrote:
David Cantrell;155455 Wrote: On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 09:55:18PM -0000, Recliner wrote:- Robin9 wrote:- Sooner or later, Ukip are going to wake up and realise that they can win the Mayoral election if they come out and state boldly that the current policies are idiotic. I'm surprised it hasn't yet dawned on them that they ought to campaign on behalf of motorists.- The mayoral election is this week, and the UKIP candidate will be lucky to get 10% of the first preference votes.- Because whoever it is hasn't bothered to do any campaigning, let alone tell anyone about any policies he has that differentiate himself from the other serious candidates and which lie within the mayor's powers. -- David Cantrell | semi-evolved ape-thing Safety tip: never strap firearms to a hamster . . . I used the term "wake up" because it is obvious the UKIP candidate simply does not understand what London politics is about. Well, he managed to come third... of the no-hoper candidates. In other words, *fifth*, beaten by both the Green and LD candidates, and of course very far behind the two serious candidates. At least he managed to beat the Women's Equality Party and George Galloway. |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
On Fri, 6 May 2016 15:46:30 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote: Robin9 wrote: . . . I used the term "wake up" because it is obvious the UKIP candidate simply does not understand what London politics is about. Well, he managed to come third... of the no-hoper candidates. In other words, *fifth*, beaten by both the Green and LD candidates, and of course very far behind the two serious candidates. At least he managed to beat the Women's Equality Party and George Galloway. Given that any immigrant from the EU who's rocked up long enough to register can vote in local elections its hardly surprising Ukip didn't do well. Turkeys don't generally vote for xmas. Quite why immigrant should get to get a vote on who runs our capital city is another question entirely. -- Spud |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
Spud wrote Recliner wrote: Well, he managed to come third... of the no-hoper candidates. In other words, *fifth*, beaten by both the Green and LD candidates, and of course very far behind the two serious candidates. At least he managed to beat the Women's Equality Party and George Galloway. Given that any immigrant from the EU who's rocked up long enough to register can vote in local elections its hardly surprising Ukip didn't do well. Turkeys don't generally vote for xmas. Quite why immigrant should get to get a vote on who runs our capital city is another question entirely. "EU Free movement of labour" Which is why a handful of Brits are Maires in France. -- Mike D |
The 20 blackspots for toxic air in London
On Fri, 6 May 2016 17:44:30 +0100
"Michael R N Dolbear" wrote: Spud wrote Recliner wrote: Well, he managed to come third... of the no-hoper candidates. In other words, *fifth*, beaten by both the Green and LD candidates, and of course very far behind the two serious candidates. At least he managed to beat the Women's Equality Party and George Galloway. Given that any immigrant from the EU who's rocked up long enough to register can vote in local elections its hardly surprising Ukip didn't do well. Turkeys don't generally vote for xmas. Quite why immigrant should get to get a vote on who runs our capital city is another question entirely. "EU Free movement of labour" Which is why a handful of Brits are Maires in France. Not interested what ex-pats are allowed to get up to, I care about this country and I don't see why Igor or Olga should be able to vote in elections since most of them will have ****ed off elsewhere in a few years anyway. -- Spud |
Quote:
If he had thought out which London issues are of major interest to the kind of people who are not repelled by UKIP - by which I mean people like me - and had concentrated on those issues, he would have done much better. I didn't vote at all. I'm glad Goldsmith didn't win. I'm even more glad the twerp Johnson is gone. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 01:34 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk