bramling
Veteran Member
Goldsmith wasn't exactly pleasant either - at least a part of his campaign relied on dog whistle racism.
Yes it seems to be part of the job description for London mayor that one has to be a weird nasty piece of work.
Goldsmith wasn't exactly pleasant either - at least a part of his campaign relied on dog whistle racism.
On the subject of Bailey, personal view however I find it incredible that the Conservatives have managed to find a mayoral candidate who’s even more odious than Khan.
Yes it seems to be part of the job description for London mayor that one has to be a weird nasty piece of work.
Much like the city!
(I kid, I kid )
Redcar... not the end of the world, but you can see it from there! (as my dad says)You're from Redcar.... not a position from which to cast aspersions (equally, I'm joshing )
Apparently the government is thinking of taking control of TFL from the Greater London Authority according to some press reports. It's rather like what happened with councils in 1986 when the GLC and other councils were abolished for not doing what Thatcher wanted.
Really though Khan has been running TFL badly as he has the wrong priorities.
Sadiq Khan has accused Boris Johnson of lying to the House of Commons, after he claimed that Transport for London had been "effectively bankrupted" by the London Mayor.
The Prime Minister was challenged by several MPs over conditions being imposed on TfL as a result of acrimonious bailout talks, including extending the congestion charge as far as the North and South Circulars and ending free travel for the under-18s.
Although he failed to respond to the substance of the questions, Mr Johnson claimed: "The current Mayor of London had effectively bankrupted TfL before coronavirus had even hit and left a massive black hole in its finances.
"Any need to make up that deficit is entirely down to him, it is entirely his responsibility.
"Any expansion of the congestion charge or any other measure taken to improve the finances of TfL are entirely the responsibility of the bankrupt current Labour Mayor of London."
He added that TfL's finances had been left in "robust" shape but destroyed by "grossly irresponsible, demagogic policies".
After PMQs, Mr Khan tweeted: "The PM has lied to the House of Commons. Before Covid I was fixing his mess at TfL- reducing the deficit by 71 per cent since 2016.
"Covid-19 is the sole cause of TfL’s challenges. The PM wants to increase fares, the congestion charge & taxes - and end free travel for children and older Londoners."
I am not sure what the basis of the various personal attacks on Sadiq Khan in this thread are nor what he has done wrong in relation to TfL.
I think that counts as tautologyHe is a slippery fish of a politician.
The fares freeze is a small (minority) part of the problem the impact of not doing the fares freeze would have left TFL needing a bailout in November rather than October.And now Sadiq Khant is blaming the government for TfLs financial problems
MPs reject motion to provide free school meals to pupils during half term
MPs have voted against a Labour motion to continue to provide free school meals to eligible students during the school holidays.www.telegraph.co.uk
And your alleged "fares freeze" had nothing to do with it?
And as much as the Prime Minister would like to pretend he isn't, the biggest intrigue about the whole thing is that Boris is one of those 21 London Conservative MPs himself!While I don't especially rate Khan, the government is playing politics here, and when it comes to the Mayoral elections next year and indeed the next General Election, the Conservative candidates will be the ones who will suffer most. There are currently 21 MPs in London, most in outer London, and a lot of residents will be directly or indirectly affected by these changes, especially the congestion charge
And now Sadiq Khant is blaming the government for TfLs financial problems
MPs reject motion to provide free school meals to pupils during half term
MPs have voted against a Labour motion to continue to provide free school meals to eligible students during the school holidays.www.telegraph.co.uk
And your alleged "fares freeze" had nothing to do with it?
- A populist "fares freeze" which has had an adverse effect on TfLs finances. Of course it isn't really a "fares freeze", as Travelcard prices and daily caps have risen every year, even if you only use TfL services. By contrast, when Boris Johnson was Mayor of London, there was one year when the price of my Zone 1 - 3 annual travelcard did not go up at all at the time of the January fares review.
Or locally until they discovered they weren't getting the promised tube frequency upgrade promised as result.Impact on TfL finances of the fares freeze has been minimal - it was a decision to "spend money" on fares rather than infrastructure - you may not agree with it but that is what the electorate wanted
TFL has been a political entity from the start, but has got worse over time. Whether moving it from one political umbrella to another would help is perhaps a matter for debate, but the current poisonous position being caught in the middle of a major game / rift just cannot continue.
What would be really good would be to split off the political side and recreate something like London Transport, and return to a focus on such mundane activities as running trains and buses!
The grant cut was partially netted out by getting a small share of business rates (which is now looking pretty worthless!). the Grant impact is far far bigger than the fares freeze though.The fare's freeze has cost TfL around £640m spread over 4 years.
The government cutting TfL's grant by £700 every single year adds up to £2.8bn over the same time period.
I wonder which one has had the bigger impact.
Also his other TFL ideas such as banning lorries from Central London
His team of advisers were very naive - these is school of thinking that they didn't understand the grant cut agreement until way to late.Problem with Khan is he has brought in a lot of idea like freezing tube fares and increasing free travel to under 18s without any idea of how to pay for it.
A couple of weeks ago I read that Westminster freezing fuel duty for 10 years is now costing the Treasury £9Bn a year compared to if Fuel Duty had continued to rise under the old system. While this is a vote winner the government has had to offset the cost of freezing fuel duty elsewhere with cuts or other tax rises. With Khan he didn't seem to understand freezing tube fares has to be paid for.
Also his other TFL ideas such as banning lorries from Central London, having TFL control Southern and other things sound good in the newspapers but would never work in practice.
Lots of Lorry moves are prohibited at night in London, the idea as successfully trialed during the Olympics was trying to maximise lorry deliveries at night. The idea was to do that permanently again.Was that a genuine idea? How on earth would shops/pubs/etc. been able to restock without large goods vehicles?
Was that a genuine idea? How on earth would shops/pubs/etc. been able to restock without large goods vehicles?
Problem with Khan is he has brought in a lot of idea like freezing tube fares and increasing free travel to under 18s without any idea of how to pay for it.
A couple of weeks ago I read that Westminster freezing fuel duty for 10 years is now costing the Treasury £9Bn a year compared to if Fuel Duty had continued to rise under the old system. While this is a vote winner the government has had to offset the cost of freezing fuel duty elsewhere with cuts or other tax rises. With Khan he didn't seem to understand freezing tube fares has to be paid for.
Also his other TFL ideas such as banning lorries from Central London, having TFL control Southern and other things sound good in the newspapers but would never work in practice.
The fares freeze is a small (minority) part of the problem the impact of not doing the fares freeze would have left TFL needing a bailout in November rather than October.
Boris did leave a few unpleasant financial issues behind to deal with.
And now Sadiq Khant is blaming the government for TfLs financial problems
MPs reject motion to provide free school meals to pupils during half term
MPs have voted against a Labour motion to continue to provide free school meals to eligible students during the school holidays.www.telegraph.co.uk
And your alleged "fares freeze" had nothing to do with it?
In hindsight I do not think the fares freeze was a great idea. Bus fares even before the freeze were on the cheap side and now they seem to be almost half that of the rest of the country. That said to be fair in hindsight I think quite a few things would have been done differently.
Boris did waste money on things such as the garden bridge and the New Routemaster for London which can‘t have helped TfL’s finances.
Going forward TfL are going to need a new funding model that involves some form of a grant as I can’t see passenger numbers, particularly on the tube getting back to 2019 levels any time in the near future.
Or maybe it should radically reduce service levels - not many people will notice the difference between 36tph and 30tph or 24tph and 20tph. Staffing levels seem very high on stations that are underground - not sure how many are really needed for safety reasons
With the collapse of the evening economy can the service close down earlier?
The bus network needs a radical change - now with hopper fares in place there is less of a case for 5-6 different services operating along the same corridors for miles on end
Lots of difficult decisions will need to be made
The fares freeze actually probably delayed the bailout earlier TfL reduced it's operational expenditure to pay for the fares freeze and as such had lower operational costs when the crisis began meaning it lasted longer without fare revenue.The fares freeze is a small (minority) part of the problem the impact of not doing the fares freeze would have left TFL needing a bailout in November rather than October.
Boris did leave a few unpleasant financial issues behind to deal with.