Climate, what climate?

[whole diary]

[CyclingSid]

If this thread is more appropriate elsewhere please move.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66351785

I am not sure I have a polite/considered response to this. Presumably have to get rid of all these cycle lanes next; they are always empty (because they move traffic more efficiently?)

[GBM]

Sorry Sid.
As a bus driver, I'm not on the cyclist side on this debate.
I have expressed my views in previous posts. 

[grahame]

Looking after the environment for everyone costs.  Things like the ULEZ  and other clean air zones, low traffic neighbourhoods, (yes) cycle lanes, 20 mph limits, cost the person with private powered transport ("cars") - and those tend to be the supporters of the party in government more that the supporters of the party in opposition.  And with an eye on the next general election, perhaps it's natural for the motorist (and motoring business) interests to be to the fore at present.  Yes, I am aware that the London ULEZ is being brought in by a Labour mayor - and perhaps that's been a warning to the Conservative party as the harm they can do at elections to their vote if they fail to support the motorist.

Compare the authorised cost of the Stonehenge Tunnel (though good for the local MPs^▸ (Member of Parliament) and the money spend will come after the next election?) with the penny-pinching actions like canning the through trains across Salisbury from Bristol, Bath, Bradford-on-Avon and Trowbridge to London Waterloo.  Looking back 18 months later, how much has that saved?

As a joined up approach, low traffic neighbourhoods can allow buses through - bus gates - and if done properly make a real positive for public transport.

[TaplowGreen]

Looking after the environment for everyone costs.  Things like the ULEZ  and other clean air zones, low traffic neighbourhoods, (yes) cycle lanes, 20 mph limits, cost the person with private powered transport ("cars") - and those tend to be the supporters of the party in government more that the supporters of the party in opposition.  And with an eye on the next general election, perhaps it's natural for the motorist (and motoring business) interests to be to the fore at present.  Yes, I am aware that the London ULEZ is being brought in by a Labour mayor - and perhaps that's been a warning to the Conservative party as the harm they can do at elections to their vote if they fail to support the motorist.

Compare the authorised cost of the Stonehenge Tunnel (though good for the local MPs^▸ (Member of Parliament) and the money spend will come after the next election?) with the penny-pinching actions like canning the through trains across Salisbury from Bristol, Bath, Bradford-on-Avon and Trowbridge to London Waterloo.  Looking back 18 months later, how much has that saved?

As a joined up approach, low traffic neighbourhoods can allow buses through - bus gates - and if done properly make a real positive for public transport.

ULEZ is primarily driven by a desire for less pollution and cleaner air rather than climate change - it cost Labour the Uxbridge by election and has given all the major parties pause for thought - it disproportionately affects the lower paid.

I'd be interested in your evidence demonstrating that the cost of ULEZ falls on those who tend to be the supporters of the Government as you suggest.

If it is the case, it's somewhat surprising that Starmer's support for it is at best lukewarm having personally urged Khan to reflect on its impact on those affected.

[grahame]

I'd be interested in your evidence demonstrating that the cost of ULEZ falls on those who tend to be the supporters of the Government as you suggest.

If it is the case, it's somewhat surprising that Starmer's support for it is at best lukewarm having personally urged Khan to reflect on its impact on those affected.

I don't think I quite suggested that - the cost falls on everyone and the party that implements it (and to a lesser degree those that support it) do themselves little good in electoral terms.

[TaplowGreen]

I'd be interested in your evidence demonstrating that the cost of ULEZ falls on those who tend to be the supporters of the Government as you suggest.

If it is the case, it's somewhat surprising that Starmer's support for it is at best lukewarm having personally urged Khan to reflect on its impact on those affected.

I don't think I quite suggested that - the cost falls on everyone and the party that implements it (and to a lesser degree those that support it) do themselves little good in electoral terms.

"Things like the ULEZ  and other clean air zones, low traffic neighbourhoods, (yes) cycle lanes, 20 mph limits, cost the person with private powered transport ("cars") - and those tend to be the supporters of the party in government more that the supporters of the party in opposition".

..........seems quite a clear suggestion to me! 

[Clan Line]

Yes, I am aware that the London ULEZ is being brought in by a Labour mayor - and perhaps that's been a warning to the Conservative party as the harm they can do at elections to their vote if they fail to support the motorist.

The London ULEZ was actually planned by some bloke called Boris; it was only introduced by the present Mayor, in 2019. The current row is over the plan to expand it to cover all of Greater London. To be honest, the whole thing is little more than "Gesture Politics" anyway - the reduction in pollution will be minimal - if any at all. When the high level polluting vehicles have been priced off the roads of London..............where will the "lost" income then come from ? easy ! .....  charge all petrol/diesel vehicles £25 (will be by then !) per day. Then when they have all gone - £50 a day for any vehicle (Except the Mayoral limo of course)

 

[Richard Fairhurst]

The Conservatives coming out against LTNs^▸ (Low Traffic Neighbourhood) will do absolute wonders for the chances of the LD/Lab/Green coalition retaining control of Oxfordshire County Council in 2025.

LTNs are broadly popular; all the polling evidence shows that. Those who don't like them are by and large already voting Tory. It's a strategy for retaining Uxbridge, not for reversing the Conservatives' recent losses or their position in the polls. Like the French generals, Sunak is fighting the last war.

[ellendune]

Yes, I am aware that the London ULEZ is being brought in by a Labour mayor - and perhaps that's been a warning to the Conservative party as the harm they can do at elections to their vote if they fail to support the motorist.

The London ULEZ was actually planned by some bloke called Boris; it was only introduced by the present Mayor, in 2019. The current row is over the plan to expand it to cover all of Greater London. To be honest, the whole thing is little more than "Gesture Politics" anyway - the reduction in pollution will be minimal - if any at all. When the high level polluting vehicles have been priced off the roads of London..............where will the "lost" income then come from ? easy ! .....  charge all petrol/diesel vehicles £25 (will be by then !) per day. Then when they have all gone - £50 a day for any vehicle (Except the Mayoral limo of course)

I am also told that its extension to the rest of Greater London by 2023 was a condition of the funding deal for TfL^» (Transport for London - about) last year.  So all down to the Conservative Government really. 

[TaplowGreen]

Yes, I am aware that the London ULEZ is being brought in by a Labour mayor - and perhaps that's been a warning to the Conservative party as the harm they can do at elections to their vote if they fail to support the motorist.

The London ULEZ was actually planned by some bloke called Boris; it was only introduced by the present Mayor, in 2019. The current row is over the plan to expand it to cover all of Greater London. To be honest, the whole thing is little more than "Gesture Politics" anyway - the reduction in pollution will be minimal - if any at all. When the high level polluting vehicles have been priced off the roads of London..............where will the "lost" income then come from ? easy ! .....  charge all petrol/diesel vehicles £25 (will be by then !) per day. Then when they have all gone - £50 a day for any vehicle (Except the Mayoral limo of course)

I am also told that its extension to the rest of Greater London by 2023 was a condition of the funding deal for TfL^» (Transport for London - about) last year.  So all down to the Conservative Government really. 

This will help you understand the full picture

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/tfl-ulez-did-conservative-government-103932039.html

[CyclingSid]

Don't expect anything anytime soon

SRN [Strategic Road Network] investment should prioritise maintenance of existing roads over the building of new ones. Transport Focus noted in its written evidence that drivers would prefer to have better maintained and managed roads over new ones, and the AA found that its members were most concerned about potholes. Yet RIS2 allocated £14.1bn for new and enhanced roads – more than it did for operations and maintenance. The committee recommended that if necessary, funding put aside for costly new road projects should be reallocated towards existing road upkeep.

Source: https://www.cyclinguk.org/news/transport-committee-report-amplifies-concerns-about-new-roads-and-traffic-growth
From https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/41071/documents/199999/default/