View Single Post
  #32   Report Post  
Old October 22nd 08, 11:53 AM posted to uk.transport.london
MIG MIG is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,154
Default Boris admits bendy-buses are safe - but he'll axe them anyway

On 22 Oct, 12:45, John B wrote:
On Oct 22, 12:27*pm, David Cantrell wrote:

I'm deeply sceptical, although it's possible that the people you spoke
to were idiots. In real life, bendies provide a much better service
than other buses on a given route.


That is, I'm afraid, not true.


Route 38 had a better service before it went all bendy. *By which I mean
there were more seats (which were more comfortable) and a more frequent
service, with journey times being about the same. *There was also less
fare-dodging.


But more standing capacity with bendies, right? Which is the important
thing when the issue is bus-you-can-get-on vs bus-you-can't.

The people of London didn't want Boris as their mayor. The people of
various unsavoury outposts that the Tories gerrymandered into Greater
London in the first place to end Labour's dominance of the County of
London wanted Boris as their mayor; the people of actual London voted
for Ken.


If what you say was true, then Livingstone wouldn't have got in in the
first place. *Nor would Labour have won the GLC elections in 1964, 1973,
and 1981.


Aye, fair; while it's true that Inner London voted for Ken this time
round, and that Outer London reliably swings Tory, I do accept it
makes more sense for the outer boroughs to be included in the
administrative unit. It's kind-of annoying that their vote dictates
what happens on issues like bendies and pedestrianisation in the
centre, which is of peripheral interest to them at best - but that's
democracy, and while democracy is crap we know pretty much every other
way of doing things is worse.

He lost because he stood as a Labour party candidate at a time when
Labour are deeply unpopular. *If he'd stayed as an independent right
from the start, he would, I am sure, have done better, maybe even well
enough to win.


I suspect you're right (although having rejoined for the second
election, I don't think he could realistically have left again for the
third). By this year, the small-c-conservative-suburban-middle-class
had finally returned to their natural Tory habitat...


Not just conservatives; don't forget that a lot of the Left would no
sooner vote New Labour than Tory, lest their hands wither and fall
off. But one can't be sure if he had the resources to run and win as
an independent in 2004 without the New Labour machinery. And he
wouldn't just have to leave the party again, he would also have to
have yet another dramatic change of politics (as he did when he
rejoined) to convince people.