Boris breaks election pledge.

[Fittster]

"Boris Johnson was on collision course today with some of his most ardent supporters after rumours emerged that he may stall on a manifesto pledge to scrap the C-Charge extension by spring next year.

Residents and businesses inside the enlarged zone – which starts at Edgware Road and Park Lane - had praised the Mayor for listening to their pleas to roll back the charging area after a major consultation last November.

But today Mr Johnson's transport adviser was reported to have said Transport for London (TfL) could not afford to ditch the lucrative charge during a recession which has punched a big hole in its finances.

Speaking to the Evening Standard Kulveer Ranger said: "We always wanted to remove it at the earliest possible opportunity but it was aspirational and these are difficult times."

TfL receives around £50million annually from the extended charging zone."




So when push comes to shove one of the new breed of Tories choose taxation over public spending cuts. You might as well vote for your favourite X-Factor contestent as in a general election for all the difference it makes.

[Bing o]

To be fair, TfL are in the st, as the losses in the City have massively impacted Tube revenues.

IIRC they were talking about a journey going up from 4.50 to 7 squid the other day (Metro I think).

We're starting to see the economy unwinding now - come election time next year, we are going to realise fully how bad things have got.

[PaulHogan]

Fittster said:

Boris breaks election pledge

and in other news, bears 5hit in the woods...

[andy_s]

So really this is an admission that the Congestion Charge is nothing to do with congestion nor indeed global warming, it's about revenue raising. It should be called The London Tax and be done with it.


and..."Transport for London (TfL) could not afford to ditch the lucrative charge during a recession which has punched a big hole in its finances." - well, how about all the individuals who are also being hit be the recession and have big holes in their finances?

Edited by andy_s on Thursday 24th September 10:58

[Spiritual_Beggar]

andy_s said:

So really this is an admission that the Congestion Charge is nothing to do with congestion nor indeed global warming, it's about revenue raising. It should be called The London Tax and be done with it.

Don't be stupid!!

That would limit it's use to London only, and we know they will eventually bring this in Nationwide if they get their way

"Gimme all your money" Tax would be a more appropriate name.

Edited by Spiritual_Beggar on Thursday 24th September 10:57

[Fittster]

Bing o said:

To be fair, TfL are in the st, as the losses in the City have massively impacted Tube revenues.

IIRC they were talking about a journey going up from 4.50 to 7 squid the other day (Metro I think).

We're starting to see the economy unwinding now - come election time next year, we are going to realise fully how bad things have got.

So you raise or maintain high levels of tax to get out of a recession rather than cut spending? I thought the Conservatives were supposed to be a low tax, business friendly party.

[JagLover]

Fittster said:

So you raise or maintain high levels of tax to get out of a recession rather than cut spending? I thought the Conservatives were supposed to be a low tax, business friendly party.

A fare for using the underground is not a tax. The fact it is increasing may reflect less public spending on subsidies.

[fido]

Fittster said:

Bing o said:

To be fair, TfL are in the st, as the losses in the City have massively impacted Tube revenues.

IIRC they were talking about a journey going up from 4.50 to 7 squid the other day (Metro I think).

We're starting to see the economy unwinding now - come election time next year, we are going to realise fully how bad things have got.

So you raise or maintain high levels of tax to get out of a recession rather than cut spending? I thought the Conservatives were supposed to be a low tax, business friendly party.

They are, except when they've got to clean up the mess left by Labour. The tube fares are a sore point, but as it's part of London .. you'd expect the bill to be picked up by people living in London .. as someone living in the outskirts of London, i'd prefer the extra congestion charge

[hornet]

Isn't this just based on rumours in the Evening Standard and the Daily Mail? I've seen a few TfL bods denying this and saying Ranger was misquoted, so until it does (or doesn't) come to pass, I'm not sure we can really get overly agitated.

ETA - from Mayorwatch and London Reconnections :-

City Hall have issued the following statement in Ranger’s name: “Boris Johnson has promised to abolish the Western Extension of the Congestion Charge and he will do so next year. Giving Londoners a say on this was a central part of his manifesto, and removing the extension is in accordance with their wishes as expressed in a detailed consultation last spring

Edited by hornet on Thursday 24th September 11:34

[RichardD]

PaulHogan said:

Fittster said:

Boris breaks election pledge

and in other news, bears 5hit in the woods...

A bear was taking a sh!t in the woods when he noticed a rabbit beside him.

"Hello Mr Rabbit" the bear said. "Can I ask, does the sh!t stick to your fur?"

"Why yes, unfortunately it does" replied the rabbit.

With that the bear picked up the rabbit and used it to wipe his ar5e.

[Fittster]

fido said:

Fittster said:

Bing o said:

To be fair, TfL are in the st, as the losses in the City have massively impacted Tube revenues.

IIRC they were talking about a journey going up from 4.50 to 7 squid the other day (Metro I think).

We're starting to see the economy unwinding now - come election time next year, we are going to realise fully how bad things have got.

So you raise or maintain high levels of tax to get out of a recession rather than cut spending? I thought the Conservatives were supposed to be a low tax, business friendly party.

They are, except when they've got to clean up the mess left by Labour. The tube fares are a sore point, but as it's part of London .. you'd expect the bill to be picked up by people living in London .. as someone living in the outskirts of London, i'd prefer the extra congestion charge

Why shouldn't tube users pay for the service they use? I see no reason why they must have a subsidized service.

The bigger picture here is that politician of all mainstream parties will find justification for tax hikes over public service cuts. The idea that swapping Gordon for Dave is going to make any difference seems a little optimistic.

[grumbledoak]

TfL spokesman and the Evening (low) Standard?

I'll wait to hear this from Boris himself, thanks.

[Gedon]

Fittster said:

fido said:

Fittster said:

Bing o said:

To be fair, TfL are in the st, as the losses in the City have massively impacted Tube revenues.

IIRC they were talking about a journey going up from 4.50 to 7 squid the other day (Metro I think).

We're starting to see the economy unwinding now - come election time next year, we are going to realise fully how bad things have got.

So you raise or maintain high levels of tax to get out of a recession rather than cut spending? I thought the Conservatives were supposed to be a low tax, business friendly party.

They are, except when they've got to clean up the mess left by Labour. The tube fares are a sore point, but as it's part of London .. you'd expect the bill to be picked up by people living in London .. as someone living in the outskirts of London, i'd prefer the extra congestion charge

Why shouldn't tube users pay for the service they use? I see no reason why they must have a subsidized service.

The bigger picture here is that politician of all mainstream parties will find justification for tax hikes over public service cuts. The idea that swapping Gordon for Dave is going to make any difference seems a little optimistic.

And there is the mistake highlighted. You are mistaking the blue tied Social-Democrats for classical conservatives (libertarian leaning).

Sadly the only choice you have in is their name/tie colour. The ethos is the same. "third way" social democractic, totalitarian, uber regulating, tax-to-waste s.

[fido]

Fittster said:

Why shouldn't tube users pay for the service they use? I see no reason why they must have a subsidized service.

Conversely, why should some people pay 50% of their income, and subsidise services they don't use at all .. in fact why don't they move to Switzerland .. oh sh8t some of them [15 hedge funds] already are! If it contributes to wealth creation (and i think a decent public transport system in our capital city does) then some form of subsidy isn't a bad thing IMO.

Edited by fido on Thursday 24th September 12:14

[BOR]

Didn't he also pledge to clean up fraund within the council ? And then his deputy got arrested for fraud ?

[zac510]

When are we getting Routemasters back?

[anonymousposter]

Bing o said:

To be fair, TfL are in the st, as the losses in the City have massively impacted Tube revenues.

In most walks of life, when this happens you look to cut costs.
Meanwhile TfL (as a public sector body) will do no such thing and instead continue with all their spending whilst increasing taxes (in the form of fares).

[hidetheelephants]

zac510 said:

When are we getting Routemasters back?

Didn't Bozza say he was going to commission the design of a 'Routemaster for the 21st century' or some such? Making it a trolley bus and bringing back clippies would be a good idea.

[Yertis]

hidetheelephants said:

bringing back clippies would be a good idea.

If they did just that bit there wouldn't be so much congestion, so no need for a charge.









That doesn't work does it... we won't be seeing clippies back will we.

[Police State]

grumbledoak said:

TfL spokesman and the Evening (low) Standard?

I'll wait to hear this from Boris himself, thanks.

Funny you should say that, but this Kuldeep Ranger guy said 2 days ago that the western extension is definately going next year. He answered a straight question with a straight answer.