On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 13:34:14 +0100, Robin wrote:

On 20/10/2020 13:13, tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
Robin wrote:
On 19/10/2020 10:04, wrote:
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 09:22:21 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 19/10/2020 08:37, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 10:23:28 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 23:01:02 on
Fri, 16
Oct 2020, Ian Jackson remarked:
People who live in the "Circular" area, are people in normal
employment with lives that mean that they have to have a car.

and an annual tax of 5,475 pounds to own one, is bloody
ridiculous

If the local councillors suggested this they would be out on
their
ears at the next election

It's only because Boris is a Tory, and most of the affected
LAs are
Labour/LibDem run that he has a hope of getting away with this
politically

but it's still a bag of nonsense socially.

It's nothing to do with congestion, but simply a potential way to
raise a poll-tax the pay for TfL's huge deficit.

After the N/S Circular, how long before the M25?

Some of the media is speculating already.

If Khan had a working pair of ******** he'd have called Boris'
bluff over
this and said "Fine, the tube and bus will stop on [date] and londons
economy will come to a halt along with the substantial part of GDP it
generates. Enjoy.". But of course he hasn't and didn't.



One problem with that may be that the idea came from the Mayor's side:

Why was he pushing back against it then? From what I read in The
Times the
other day it was Number 10 and the DtT pushing on moving the LEZ
outwards as
a condition for the extra money.


The only sources I saw cited were the Mayor and his colleagues.

Please show it. Every source I can find says the exact opposite.

really, I can't find that

all I can find is Khan claiming that the DfT have told him to do this



And
politicians have been known to have it put about that A is seeking X so
they can then tell the public that X is unacceptable and they will fight
to their last breath to oppose it.

I've already posted clear news reports that this is a government plan
that
they're trying to force on TfL.* Khan is strongly against it. And it
looks
like the public is on his side:
https://www.onlondon.co.uk/new-polling-most-londoners-blame-covid-or-government-for-tfl-financial-woes-back-ltns-and-are-satisfied-with-sadiq-khan/




FWIW it was AIUI Sky who broke the story. They included in what I read
reference to "a source close to" DfT but - as I only noticed on a 2nd,
slower reading - not attributing to /that/ source the idea of extending
the CC zone.

https://news.sky.com/story/governmen...ilout-12105037

So that confirms that this idea is purely from the government, and strongly opposed by the mayor: the exact opposite of
what you said.

On Tue, 20 Oct 2020 13:10:39 +0100, "tim..." wrote:



"Trolleybus" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 21:11:17 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Arthur Figgis wrote:
On 19/10/2020 10:38, tim... wrote:

not helped by biased headlines like this:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...sted-cash.html



Serious question: would many Daily Mail readers be expected to vote for
Khan at the best of times? While Bailey is not exactly a stereotypical
Mail reader's dream candidate either, he does seem to say things which
might align with their views on everything apart from that.


To what extent are readers' votes influenced by newspaper headlines? For
example, the Sun scrupulously says whatever Rupert dictates, but do
typical
Sun readers share his politics views? The Mail traditionally appealed to
younger women, who aren't likely to be nearly as right wing

I remember having a heated alcohol-fuelled argument on just this with
a mature friend who was taking a media studies degree (in pre-Internet
days). I claimed that if you're only ever exposed to one side of an
argument then, of course, you'll tend to favour it. I was told that
people are exposed to many sources of information and I was accusing
newspaper readers of being too stupid to think for themselves.

The older I get the more I think I was right, as a generalisation. And
clearly the press barons are spending their money for a reason.

I don't claim to know the answer but it took me many years to realise
how strongly confirmation bias affects our opinions and just how
illogical human minds are.

that might have worked 20 years ago when perhaps 50% of people took a daily
paper

but now that we are down at less than 15%, not sure it's gonna hold true



And even those who still read newspapers now have many other, faster, sources of news.

tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
Robin wrote:
On 19/10/2020 10:04, wrote:
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 09:22:21 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 19/10/2020 08:37, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 10:23:28 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 23:01:02 on Fri,
16
Oct 2020, Ian Jackson remarked:
People who live in the "Circular" area, are people in normal
employment with lives that mean that they have to have a car.

and an annual tax of 5,475 pounds to own one, is bloody ridiculous

If the local councillors suggested this they would be out on their
ears at the next election

It's only because Boris is a Tory, and most of the affected LAs
are
Labour/LibDem run that he has a hope of getting away with this
politically

but it's still a bag of nonsense socially.

It's nothing to do with congestion, but simply a potential way to
raise a poll-tax the pay for TfL's huge deficit.

After the N/S Circular, how long before the M25?

Some of the media is speculating already.

If Khan had a working pair of ******** he'd have called Boris' bluff
over
this and said "Fine, the tube and bus will stop on [date] and londons
economy will come to a halt along with the substantial part of GDP it
generates. Enjoy.". But of course he hasn't and didn't.



One problem with that may be that the idea came from the Mayor's side:

Why was he pushing back against it then? From what I read in The Times
the
other day it was Number 10 and the DtT pushing on moving the LEZ
outwards as
a condition for the extra money.


The only sources I saw cited were the Mayor and his colleagues.

Please show it. Every source I can find says the exact opposite.

really, I can't find that

all I can find is Khan claiming that the DfT have told him to do this

Indeed. And now apparently the government is threatening to seize control
of TfL if Khan resists their demands:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/sadiq-khan-condemns-government-tfl-funding-plan-a4572368.html

Sadiq Khan has accused the Government of trying to “punish� Londoners with
a “triple whammy� of price hikes as part of a financial support plan for
TfL.

The capital’s mayor called for the “draconian� proposals, which include a
larger congestion charge zone and higher Tube and bus fares, to be
reconsidered.

Transport Secretary Grant Shapps proposed the measures, for which in return
TfL would receive six months of rescue funding lasting from now until Match
next year. He also suggested that the Government would seize control of TfL
if the measures were not followed.

But Mr Khan refused to accept the proposal outlined in a letter from Mr
Shapps, telling ministers that it was “completely unacceptable,� and
“singles out Londoners for punishment.�

He: "I simply cannot accept this Government plan, which would hit Londoners
with a triple whammy of higher costs at a time when so many people are
already facing hardship.

"The Government should be supporting Londoners through this difficult time
– not making ill-advised and draconian proposals which will choke off our
economic recovery.�

Ministers want to extend the £15 Congestion Charge Zone to the North and
South circular roads in 12 months' time. This would see the zone expanded
to cover approximately four million more Londoners.

The Government also wants to increase TfL fares and is “doubling down� on
their demand to remove free travel for under-18s, City Hall said.

He wrote to Mr Khan saying that the Government would take "reserve
legislative powers allowing us if necessary to direct TfL" if the measures
were not followed.

Mr Shapps, in a letter seen by the Financial Times, said that Downing
Street's seizure of TfL would be combined with a further series of
"short-term funding settlements.�

The London Mayor said an expansion of the congestion zone would have
negative economic consequences and a council tax supplement would “place
even more reliance on an already broken form of taxation and would be
regressive�.

It comes after the Government agreed on Friday to extend its financial
support of TfL for two weeks while negotiations on a new bailout continue.

TfL boss Andy Byford described the two-week extension as a “sensible
pragmatic solution� that “keeps people’s minds focused�.

He added: “We can now get this deal done. We really are very close, and
it’s absolute top priority for all of us to get this thing across the line,
and I believe that the two weeks will suffice.�

TfL’s finances have been severely hit by the drop in travel caused by the
coronavirus pandemic. A £1.6 billion bailout agreed with Mr Khan in May put
funding in place until Saturday.

It was reported last month that Mr Khan was seeking a £5.7 billion bailout
to keep London’s transport system going for the next 18 months.

… continues with predictable union leader comments

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
Robin wrote:
On 19/10/2020 10:04, wrote:
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 09:22:21 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 19/10/2020 08:37, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 10:23:28 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 23:01:02 on
Fri,
16
Oct 2020, Ian Jackson remarked:
People who live in the "Circular" area, are people in normal
employment with lives that mean that they have to have a car.

and an annual tax of 5,475 pounds to own one, is bloody
ridiculous

If the local councillors suggested this they would be out on
their
ears at the next election

It's only because Boris is a Tory, and most of the affected LAs
are
Labour/LibDem run that he has a hope of getting away with this
politically

but it's still a bag of nonsense socially.

It's nothing to do with congestion, but simply a potential way to
raise a poll-tax the pay for TfL's huge deficit.

After the N/S Circular, how long before the M25?

Some of the media is speculating already.

If Khan had a working pair of ******** he'd have called Boris' bluff
over
this and said "Fine, the tube and bus will stop on [date] and
londons
economy will come to a halt along with the substantial part of GDP
it
generates. Enjoy.". But of course he hasn't and didn't.



One problem with that may be that the idea came from the Mayor's
side:

Why was he pushing back against it then? From what I read in The Times
the
other day it was Number 10 and the DtT pushing on moving the LEZ
outwards as
a condition for the extra money.


The only sources I saw cited were the Mayor and his colleagues.

Please show it. Every source I can find says the exact opposite.

really, I can't find that

all I can find is Khan claiming that the DfT have told him to do this

Indeed. And now apparently the government is threatening to seize control
of TfL if Khan resists their demands:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/sadiq-khan-condemns-government-tfl-funding-plan-a4572368.html

Sadiq Khan has accused the Government of trying to “punish� Londoners with
a “triple whammy� of price hikes as part of a financial support plan for
TfL.

The capital’s mayor called for the “draconian� proposals, which include a
larger congestion charge zone and higher Tube and bus fares, to be
reconsidered.

Transport Secretary Grant Shapps proposed the measures, for which in
return
TfL would receive six months of rescue funding lasting from now until
Match
next year. He also suggested that the Government would seize control of
TfL
if the measures were not followed.

But Mr Khan refused to accept the proposal outlined in a letter from Mr
Shapps, telling ministers that it was “completely unacceptable,� and
“singles out Londoners for punishment.�

He: "I simply cannot accept this Government plan, which would hit
Londoners
with a triple whammy of higher costs at a time when so many people are
already facing hardship.

"The Government should be supporting Londoners through this difficult time
– not making ill-advised and draconian proposals which will choke off our
economic recovery.�

Ministers want to extend the £15 Congestion Charge Zone to the North and
South circular roads in 12 months' time. This would see the zone expanded
to cover approximately four million more Londoners.

The Government also wants to increase TfL fares and is “doubling down� on
their demand to remove free travel for under-18s, City Hall said.

apart from it being (from a socialist POV), "The right thing to do", what is
the logical justification for 16-18s travelling free?

I can see that giving over 60s a pass encourages them to give up their car
(as it has done for me), and thus reduces the potential extra congestion my
keeping it would create.

ditto allowing parents to take, under 12s for example with them for free

but that can't be the justification for 16-18 YO, which simply seems to be
based upon the theory that they are unwaged (not all are). A basis of
assigning free travel that almost nowhere else (in the world) uses.

tim

tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
Robin wrote:
On 19/10/2020 10:04, wrote:
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 09:22:21 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 19/10/2020 08:37, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 10:23:28 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 23:01:02 on
Fri,
16
Oct 2020, Ian Jackson remarked:
People who live in the "Circular" area, are people in normal
employment with lives that mean that they have to have a car.

and an annual tax of 5,475 pounds to own one, is bloody
ridiculous

If the local councillors suggested this they would be out on
their
ears at the next election

It's only because Boris is a Tory, and most of the affected LAs
are
Labour/LibDem run that he has a hope of getting away with this
politically

but it's still a bag of nonsense socially.

It's nothing to do with congestion, but simply a potential way to
raise a poll-tax the pay for TfL's huge deficit.

After the N/S Circular, how long before the M25?

Some of the media is speculating already.

If Khan had a working pair of ******** he'd have called Boris' bluff
over
this and said "Fine, the tube and bus will stop on [date] and
londons
economy will come to a halt along with the substantial part of GDP
it
generates. Enjoy.". But of course he hasn't and didn't.



One problem with that may be that the idea came from the Mayor's
side:

Why was he pushing back against it then? From what I read in The Times
the
other day it was Number 10 and the DtT pushing on moving the LEZ
outwards as
a condition for the extra money.


The only sources I saw cited were the Mayor and his colleagues.

Please show it. Every source I can find says the exact opposite.

really, I can't find that

all I can find is Khan claiming that the DfT have told him to do this

Indeed. And now apparently the government is threatening to seize control
of TfL if Khan resists their demands:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/sadiq-khan-condemns-government-tfl-funding-plan-a4572368.html

Sadiq Khan has accused the Government of trying to “punish� Londoners with
a “triple whammy� of price hikes as part of a financial support plan for
TfL.

The capital’s mayor called for the “draconian� proposals, which include a
larger congestion charge zone and higher Tube and bus fares, to be
reconsidered.

Transport Secretary Grant Shapps proposed the measures, for which in
return
TfL would receive six months of rescue funding lasting from now until
Match
next year. He also suggested that the Government would seize control of
TfL
if the measures were not followed.

But Mr Khan refused to accept the proposal outlined in a letter from Mr
Shapps, telling ministers that it was “completely unacceptable,� and
“singles out Londoners for punishment.�

He: "I simply cannot accept this Government plan, which would hit
Londoners
with a triple whammy of higher costs at a time when so many people are
already facing hardship.

"The Government should be supporting Londoners through this difficult time
– not making ill-advised and draconian proposals which will choke off our
economic recovery.�

Ministers want to extend the £15 Congestion Charge Zone to the North and
South circular roads in 12 months' time. This would see the zone expanded
to cover approximately four million more Londoners.

The Government also wants to increase TfL fares and is “doubling down� on
their demand to remove free travel for under-18s, City Hall said.

apart from it being (from a socialist POV), "The right thing to do", what is
the logical justification for 16-18s travelling free?

I can see that giving over 60s a pass encourages them to give up their car
(as it has done for me), and thus reduces the potential extra congestion my
keeping it would create.

ditto allowing parents to take, under 12s for example with them for free

but that can't be the justification for 16-18 YO, which simply seems to be
based upon the theory that they are unwaged (not all are). A basis of
assigning free travel that almost nowhere else (in the world) uses.

It looks like Khan is winning this war of words; the floundering former
mayor of London is being outsmarted by current mayors:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/10/21/boris-johnson-picking-fights-local-leaders-losing/

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
Robin wrote:
On 19/10/2020 10:04, wrote:
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 09:22:21 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 19/10/2020 08:37, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 10:23:28 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 23:01:02 on
Fri,
16
Oct 2020, Ian Jackson
remarked:
People who live in the "Circular" area, are people in normal
employment with lives that mean that they have to have a car.

and an annual tax of 5,475 pounds to own one, is bloody
ridiculous

If the local councillors suggested this they would be out on
their
ears at the next election

It's only because Boris is a Tory, and most of the affected
LAs
are
Labour/LibDem run that he has a hope of getting away with this
politically

but it's still a bag of nonsense socially.

It's nothing to do with congestion, but simply a potential way
to
raise a poll-tax the pay for TfL's huge deficit.

After the N/S Circular, how long before the M25?

Some of the media is speculating already.

If Khan had a working pair of ******** he'd have called Boris'
bluff
over
this and said "Fine, the tube and bus will stop on [date] and
londons
economy will come to a halt along with the substantial part of GDP
it
generates. Enjoy.". But of course he hasn't and didn't.



One problem with that may be that the idea came from the Mayor's
side:

Why was he pushing back against it then? From what I read in The
Times
the
other day it was Number 10 and the DtT pushing on moving the LEZ
outwards as
a condition for the extra money.


The only sources I saw cited were the Mayor and his colleagues.

Please show it. Every source I can find says the exact opposite.

really, I can't find that

all I can find is Khan claiming that the DfT have told him to do this

Indeed. And now apparently the government is threatening to seize
control
of TfL if Khan resists their demands:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/sadiq-khan-condemns-government-tfl-funding-plan-a4572368.html

Sadiq Khan has accused the Government of trying to “punish� Londoners
with
a “triple whammy� of price hikes as part of a financial support plan for
TfL.

The capital’s mayor called for the “draconian� proposals, which include
a
larger congestion charge zone and higher Tube and bus fares, to be
reconsidered.

Transport Secretary Grant Shapps proposed the measures, for which in
return
TfL would receive six months of rescue funding lasting from now until
Match
next year. He also suggested that the Government would seize control of
TfL
if the measures were not followed.

But Mr Khan refused to accept the proposal outlined in a letter from Mr
Shapps, telling ministers that it was “completely unacceptable,� and
“singles out Londoners for punishment.�

He: "I simply cannot accept this Government plan, which would hit
Londoners
with a triple whammy of higher costs at a time when so many people are
already facing hardship.

"The Government should be supporting Londoners through this difficult
time
– not making ill-advised and draconian proposals which will choke off
our
economic recovery.�

Ministers want to extend the £15 Congestion Charge Zone to the North and
South circular roads in 12 months' time. This would see the zone
expanded
to cover approximately four million more Londoners.

The Government also wants to increase TfL fares and is “doubling down�
on
their demand to remove free travel for under-18s, City Hall said.

apart from it being (from a socialist POV), "The right thing to do", what
is
the logical justification for 16-18s travelling free?

I can see that giving over 60s a pass encourages them to give up their
car
(as it has done for me), and thus reduces the potential extra congestion
my
keeping it would create.

ditto allowing parents to take, under 12s for example with them for free

but that can't be the justification for 16-18 YO, which simply seems to
be
based upon the theory that they are unwaged (not all are). A basis of
assigning free travel that almost nowhere else (in the world) uses.

It looks like Khan is winning this war of words; the floundering former
mayor of London is being outsmarted by current mayors:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/10/21/boris-johnson-picking-fights-local-leaders-losing/

not helped by, reported yesterday:

Government spokesperson saying "we didn't suggest that the CC zone should be
extended"

to elicit the response of AN Other holding up letter from Minster saying
exactly that

I can only repeat my OP, that this is the most socially unfair idea for fund
raising that any politician has ever suggested

tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
Robin wrote:
On 19/10/2020 10:04, wrote:
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 09:22:21 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 19/10/2020 08:37, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 10:23:28 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 23:01:02 on
Fri,
16
Oct 2020, Ian Jackson
remarked:
People who live in the "Circular" area, are people in normal
employment with lives that mean that they have to have a car.

and an annual tax of 5,475 pounds to own one, is bloody
ridiculous

If the local councillors suggested this they would be out on
their
ears at the next election

It's only because Boris is a Tory, and most of the affected
LAs
are
Labour/LibDem run that he has a hope of getting away with this
politically

but it's still a bag of nonsense socially.

It's nothing to do with congestion, but simply a potential way
to
raise a poll-tax the pay for TfL's huge deficit.

After the N/S Circular, how long before the M25?

Some of the media is speculating already.

If Khan had a working pair of ******** he'd have called Boris'
bluff
over
this and said "Fine, the tube and bus will stop on [date] and
londons
economy will come to a halt along with the substantial part of GDP
it
generates. Enjoy.". But of course he hasn't and didn't.



One problem with that may be that the idea came from the Mayor's
side:

Why was he pushing back against it then? From what I read in The
Times
the
other day it was Number 10 and the DtT pushing on moving the LEZ
outwards as
a condition for the extra money.


The only sources I saw cited were the Mayor and his colleagues.

Please show it. Every source I can find says the exact opposite.

really, I can't find that

all I can find is Khan claiming that the DfT have told him to do this

Indeed. And now apparently the government is threatening to seize
control
of TfL if Khan resists their demands:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/sadiq-khan-condemns-government-tfl-funding-plan-a4572368.html

Sadiq Khan has accused the Government of trying to “punish� Londoners
with
a “triple whammy� of price hikes as part of a financial support plan for
TfL.

The capital’s mayor called for the “draconian� proposals, which include
a
larger congestion charge zone and higher Tube and bus fares, to be
reconsidered.

Transport Secretary Grant Shapps proposed the measures, for which in
return
TfL would receive six months of rescue funding lasting from now until
Match
next year. He also suggested that the Government would seize control of
TfL
if the measures were not followed.

But Mr Khan refused to accept the proposal outlined in a letter from Mr
Shapps, telling ministers that it was “completely unacceptable,� and
“singles out Londoners for punishment.�

He: "I simply cannot accept this Government plan, which would hit
Londoners
with a triple whammy of higher costs at a time when so many people are
already facing hardship.

"The Government should be supporting Londoners through this difficult
time
– not making ill-advised and draconian proposals which will choke off
our
economic recovery.�

Ministers want to extend the £15 Congestion Charge Zone to the North and
South circular roads in 12 months' time. This would see the zone
expanded
to cover approximately four million more Londoners.

The Government also wants to increase TfL fares and is “doubling down�
on
their demand to remove free travel for under-18s, City Hall said.

apart from it being (from a socialist POV), "The right thing to do", what
is
the logical justification for 16-18s travelling free?

I can see that giving over 60s a pass encourages them to give up their
car
(as it has done for me), and thus reduces the potential extra congestion
my
keeping it would create.

ditto allowing parents to take, under 12s for example with them for free

but that can't be the justification for 16-18 YO, which simply seems to
be
based upon the theory that they are unwaged (not all are). A basis of
assigning free travel that almost nowhere else (in the world) uses.

It looks like Khan is winning this war of words; the floundering former
mayor of London is being outsmarted by current mayors:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/10/21/boris-johnson-picking-fights-local-leaders-losing/

not helped by, reported yesterday:

Government spokesperson saying "we didn't suggest that the CC zone should be
extended"

to elicit the response of AN Other holding up letter from Minster saying
exactly that

I can only repeat my OP, that this is the most socially unfair idea for fund
raising that any politician has ever suggested

What do you think of the other government demand, that council tax be
raised to partially cover the TfL black hole? It would have to be a
non-trivial amount per household to make much of a difference, let's say
£100 in band D.

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
Robin wrote:
On 19/10/2020 10:04, wrote:
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 09:22:21 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 19/10/2020 08:37, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 10:23:28 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 23:01:02
on
Fri,
16
Oct 2020, Ian Jackson
remarked:
People who live in the "Circular" area, are people in normal
employment with lives that mean that they have to have a
car.

and an annual tax of 5,475 pounds to own one, is bloody
ridiculous

If the local councillors suggested this they would be out on
their
ears at the next election

It's only because Boris is a Tory, and most of the affected
LAs
are
Labour/LibDem run that he has a hope of getting away with
this
politically

but it's still a bag of nonsense socially.

It's nothing to do with congestion, but simply a potential
way
to
raise a poll-tax the pay for TfL's huge deficit.

After the N/S Circular, how long before the M25?

Some of the media is speculating already.

If Khan had a working pair of ******** he'd have called Boris'
bluff
over
this and said "Fine, the tube and bus will stop on [date] and
londons
economy will come to a halt along with the substantial part of
GDP
it
generates. Enjoy.". But of course he hasn't and didn't.



One problem with that may be that the idea came from the Mayor's
side:

Why was he pushing back against it then? From what I read in The
Times
the
other day it was Number 10 and the DtT pushing on moving the LEZ
outwards as
a condition for the extra money.


The only sources I saw cited were the Mayor and his colleagues.

Please show it. Every source I can find says the exact opposite.

really, I can't find that

all I can find is Khan claiming that the DfT have told him to do this

Indeed. And now apparently the government is threatening to seize
control
of TfL if Khan resists their demands:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/sadiq-khan-condemns-government-tfl-funding-plan-a4572368.html

Sadiq Khan has accused the Government of trying to “punish� Londoners
with
a “triple whammy� of price hikes as part of a financial support plan
for
TfL.

The capital’s mayor called for the “draconian� proposals, which
include
a
larger congestion charge zone and higher Tube and bus fares, to be
reconsidered.

Transport Secretary Grant Shapps proposed the measures, for which in
return
TfL would receive six months of rescue funding lasting from now until
Match
next year. He also suggested that the Government would seize control
of
TfL
if the measures were not followed.

But Mr Khan refused to accept the proposal outlined in a letter from
Mr
Shapps, telling ministers that it was “completely unacceptable,� and
“singles out Londoners for punishment.�

He: "I simply cannot accept this Government plan, which would hit
Londoners
with a triple whammy of higher costs at a time when so many people are
already facing hardship.

"The Government should be supporting Londoners through this difficult
time
– not making ill-advised and draconian proposals which will choke off
our
economic recovery.�

Ministers want to extend the £15 Congestion Charge Zone to the North
and
South circular roads in 12 months' time. This would see the zone
expanded
to cover approximately four million more Londoners.

The Government also wants to increase TfL fares and is “doubling down�
on
their demand to remove free travel for under-18s, City Hall said.

apart from it being (from a socialist POV), "The right thing to do",
what
is
the logical justification for 16-18s travelling free?

I can see that giving over 60s a pass encourages them to give up their
car
(as it has done for me), and thus reduces the potential extra
congestion
my
keeping it would create.

ditto allowing parents to take, under 12s for example with them for
free

but that can't be the justification for 16-18 YO, which simply seems to
be
based upon the theory that they are unwaged (not all are). A basis of
assigning free travel that almost nowhere else (in the world) uses.

It looks like Khan is winning this war of words; the floundering former
mayor of London is being outsmarted by current mayors:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/10/21/boris-johnson-picking-fights-local-leaders-losing/

not helped by, reported yesterday:

Government spokesperson saying "we didn't suggest that the CC zone should
be
extended"

to elicit the response of AN Other holding up letter from Minster saying
exactly that

I can only repeat my OP, that this is the most socially unfair idea for
fund
raising that any politician has ever suggested

What do you think of the other government demand, that council tax be
raised to partially cover the TfL black hole?

at least it's fair to all Londoners

It would have to be a
non-trivial amount per household to make much of a difference, let's say
£100 in band D.

100 pound for all, is tiny in comparison to a 5 grand CC charge levied on a
minority

Personally, I don't accept the premise that PT has to be self funding, but
we are where we are on that one

In message , at 15:46:57 on Thu, 22 Oct
2020, tim... remarked:

Personally, I don't accept the premise that PT has to be self funding,
but we are where we are on that one

Even with these extra 'taxes', it won't be.

All we are arguing about is the amount of subsidy.
--
Roland Perry

tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
Robin wrote:
On 19/10/2020 10:04, wrote:
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 09:22:21 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 19/10/2020 08:37, wrote:
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 10:23:28 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 23:01:02
on
Fri,
16
Oct 2020, Ian Jackson
remarked:
People who live in the "Circular" area, are people in normal
employment with lives that mean that they have to have a
car.

and an annual tax of 5,475 pounds to own one, is bloody
ridiculous

If the local councillors suggested this they would be out on
their
ears at the next election

It's only because Boris is a Tory, and most of the affected
LAs
are
Labour/LibDem run that he has a hope of getting away with
this
politically

but it's still a bag of nonsense socially.

It's nothing to do with congestion, but simply a potential
way
to
raise a poll-tax the pay for TfL's huge deficit.

After the N/S Circular, how long before the M25?

Some of the media is speculating already.

If Khan had a working pair of ******** he'd have called Boris'
bluff
over
this and said "Fine, the tube and bus will stop on [date] and
londons
economy will come to a halt along with the substantial part of
GDP
it
generates. Enjoy.". But of course he hasn't and didn't.



One problem with that may be that the idea came from the Mayor's
side:

Why was he pushing back against it then? From what I read in The
Times
the
other day it was Number 10 and the DtT pushing on moving the LEZ
outwards as
a condition for the extra money.


The only sources I saw cited were the Mayor and his colleagues.

Please show it. Every source I can find says the exact opposite.

really, I can't find that

all I can find is Khan claiming that the DfT have told him to do this

Indeed. And now apparently the government is threatening to seize
control
of TfL if Khan resists their demands:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/sadiq-khan-condemns-government-tfl-funding-plan-a4572368.html

Sadiq Khan has accused the Government of trying to “punish� Londoners
with
a “triple whammy� of price hikes as part of a financial support plan
for
TfL.

The capital’s mayor called for the “draconian� proposals, which
include
a
larger congestion charge zone and higher Tube and bus fares, to be
reconsidered.

Transport Secretary Grant Shapps proposed the measures, for which in
return
TfL would receive six months of rescue funding lasting from now until
Match
next year. He also suggested that the Government would seize control
of
TfL
if the measures were not followed.

But Mr Khan refused to accept the proposal outlined in a letter from
Mr
Shapps, telling ministers that it was “completely unacceptable,� and
“singles out Londoners for punishment.�

He: "I simply cannot accept this Government plan, which would hit
Londoners
with a triple whammy of higher costs at a time when so many people are
already facing hardship.

"The Government should be supporting Londoners through this difficult
time
– not making ill-advised and draconian proposals which will choke off
our
economic recovery.�

Ministers want to extend the £15 Congestion Charge Zone to the North
and
South circular roads in 12 months' time. This would see the zone
expanded
to cover approximately four million more Londoners.

The Government also wants to increase TfL fares and is “doubling down�
on
their demand to remove free travel for under-18s, City Hall said.

apart from it being (from a socialist POV), "The right thing to do",
what
is
the logical justification for 16-18s travelling free?

I can see that giving over 60s a pass encourages them to give up their
car
(as it has done for me), and thus reduces the potential extra
congestion
my
keeping it would create.

ditto allowing parents to take, under 12s for example with them for
free

but that can't be the justification for 16-18 YO, which simply seems to
be
based upon the theory that they are unwaged (not all are). A basis of
assigning free travel that almost nowhere else (in the world) uses.

It looks like Khan is winning this war of words; the floundering former
mayor of London is being outsmarted by current mayors:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/10/21/boris-johnson-picking-fights-local-leaders-losing/

not helped by, reported yesterday:

Government spokesperson saying "we didn't suggest that the CC zone should
be
extended"

to elicit the response of AN Other holding up letter from Minster saying
exactly that

I can only repeat my OP, that this is the most socially unfair idea for
fund
raising that any politician has ever suggested

What do you think of the other government demand, that council tax be
raised to partially cover the TfL black hole?

at least it's fair to all Londoners

It would have to be a
non-trivial amount per household to make much of a difference, let's say
£100 in band D.

100 pound for all, is tiny in comparison to a 5 grand CC charge levied on a
minority

Yes, thinking about it, the charge would have to be quite a bit higher to
raise significant money. Maybe closer to £500?


Personally, I don't accept the premise that PT has to be self funding, but
we are where we are on that one

Yup, though capital expenditure isn't covered by the fares, even in good
times.