ULEZ Letter

Ah but it’s ok to call tories cultist / cunts / gammons etc?

They don’t like it up ‘em sir…

So you concede that the Tories chose not to oppose the rollout of ULEZ in order to make it into an electoral football at a later stage?

Yes it is. Are you okay with voting for the party of 30p Lee or will you be abstaining?
 
So you concede that the Tories chose not to oppose the rollout of ULEZ in order to make it into an electoral football at a later stage?

Yes it is. Are you okay with voting for the party of 30p Lee or will you be abstaining?

They (the government) could not oppose it, it’s within the power of the mayor - some Tory councils took Khan to court on a technicality, lost, and the judge told them as much. It would be a case of a waste of taxpayers money and we’ve had a few of them.

Regarding a clever plot I doubt they are that forward thinking. Of course they’re making political capital out of it following the recent election result as it was an issue for the voter but they have very little else to attack Labour on as they are both broadly agreeing with each other.

Outside the impacted it’s unlikely to register on a list of wider GE voter concerns - nor do I see the issue of a mayor exercising their lawful powers a matter for the national government - if they don’t like it remove those powers, don’t complain about how they use them. The local voters can deal with it at the mayoral ballot box as is their democratic right. At best the tories might win one or two seats as a consequence but it’s not going to make a scrap of difference to the outcome.
 
They (the government) could not oppose it, it’s within the power of the mayor - some Tory councils took Khan to court on a technicality, lost, and the judge told them as much. It would be a case of a waste of taxpayers money and we’ve had a few of them.

Regarding a clever plot I doubt they are that forward thinking. Of course they’re making political capital out of it following the recent election result as it was an issue for the voter but they have very little else to attack Labour on as they are both broadly agreeing with each other.

Outside the impacted it’s unlikely to register on a list of wider GE voter concerns - nor do I see the issue of a mayor exercising their lawful powers a matter for the national government - if they don’t like it remove those powers, don’t complain about how they use them. The local voters can deal with it at the mayoral ballot box as is their democratic right. At best the tories might win one or two seats as a consequence but it’s not going to make a scrap of difference to the outcome.

Which they could have done last year?
 
Which they could have done last year?

I’m sure they could have done but it would have gone against the devolution the tories (originally as a coalition) had implemented since 2010. I’d argue that removing powers mid term is undemocratic as well, the people voted for a mayor who made specific promises based on the powers they possess as mayor - reform (that reduces those) should only routinely come in to force at time of election of course there may be specific “with good cause” where those powers should be curtailed but just because you don’t like a policy, that isn’t illegal, doesn’t come close to the good cause definition. It’s for the incumbent mayor to justify the policies that they implement to their electorate, like all politicians Khan will have worked out the risks to his political future of enlarging ULEZ.
 
I’m sure they could have done but it would have gone against the devolution the tories (originally as a coalition) had implemented since 2010. I’d argue that removing powers mid term is undemocratic as well, the people voted for a mayor who made specific promises based on the powers they possess as mayor - reform (that reduces those) should only routinely come in to force at time of election of course there may be specific “with good cause” where those powers should be curtailed but just because you don’t like a policy, that isn’t illegal, doesn’t come close to the good cause definition. It’s for the incumbent mayor to justify the policies that they implement to their electorate, like all politicians Khan will have worked out the risks to his political future of enlarging ULEZ.
I think what you need to appreciate is that while most of us are occasionally wrong or Ill informed, others are correct all the time. The internet and particularly BM politics sub forum is a very serious thing. Have some empathy for those with a 100% record of being right on the internet.
 
I’m sure they could have done but it would have gone against the devolution the tories (originally as a coalition) had implemented since 2010. I’d argue that removing powers mid term is undemocratic as well, the people voted for a mayor who made specific promises based on the powers they possess as mayor - reform (that reduces those) should only routinely come in to force at time of election of course there may be specific “with good cause” where those powers should be curtailed but just because you don’t like a policy, that isn’t illegal, doesn’t come close to the good cause definition. It’s for the incumbent mayor to justify the policies that they implement to their electorate, like all politicians Khan will have worked out the risks to his political future of enlarging ULEZ.

Is your view of this reflected in statements made by senior Tories ?
 
I think what you need to appreciate is that while most of us are occasionally wrong or Ill informed, others are correct all the time. The internet and particularly BM politics sub forum is a very serious thing. Have some empathy for those with a 100% record of being right on the internet.

I've already said I was mistaken. But the Tories seemingly chose not to oppose it and not for principled reasons to do with democracy.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.