Boltar wrote:
Bit of selective cut and pasting by you there I think. You
forgot the next bit:"The only enthusiasm came from 71 people living
way beyond the terminus, in Buckinghamshire.". Last time I looked
71 people is not 30% of 16895. So I suspect this journalist is
playing a bit fast and loose with the facts.

Between the 70% opposed to it and the 71 from rural Bucks who were
enthusiastic, there were presumably 29.996% who weren't terribly
bothered either way.

On an aside I'd also be interested to know why TfL thought it
appropriate to do the survey in 11 languages. If people can't be
arsed to learnt [sic] the language of the country they're living in
[,] why the hell should they be allowed to give their views and
perhaps influence people who do give a **** about this place?

I'm not sure why you deserve a response, given the standard of English
in that last sentence, but it's probably because they are the very
people in Southall whose welfare you were concerned about in your
previous post, all of 21 minutes earlier. Remember?
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

I'm not sure why you deserve a response, given the standard of English
in that last sentence, but it's probably because they are the very
people in Southall whose welfare you were concerned about in your
previous post, all of 21 minutes earlier. Remember?

Never heard of a typo? And my god , what a patronising reply
for the people of Southall. You ever been there? I have on
numerous occasions and I've never met anyone there who
couldn't speak English. The only people who can't be
bothered to learn the language are the ones who really don't
give a toss about this country but just use the place as a
convenient location to wash up in. So **** them and their
opinions and TfL should not have wasted money translating
into 11 languages. Same goes for my local council and its
endless PC efforts in all its hopeless multi ligual booklets.

B2003