I'm quite surprised to see the racism card brandished so quickly by you flecc, I expected a more reasoned argument. I'm sure "Tony19512 doesn't need me or anyone else to defend him, but as a non Londoner I see a lot which makes me glad I don't live in the area and Khan's ethnic background or religious leanings don't make the top of the list at all. But plenty of other things he should be concentrating on as mayor do.
I didn't accuse, I asked the question. But your response certainly justifies my asking it. You are glad you dont live in this area because of Sadiq's ethnic background and religious leanings? Those are simply appalling views, condemning a man and his ability to do a job due to his ethnic background and religion on the basis of ignorance.
What things? Do you even have a clue what he has been doing or what it is that made Londoners vote so overwhelmingly for him three times now? It is because he is successfully doing exactly what is needed and because we in London are overwhelmingly one people, largely free of the racial and religious bigotry that poisons the views of so many.
That was not what I said and you know it. A poor phrasing of a sentence on my part possibly. But your obvious intent to make it appear so is simply disappointing.
to late google corporate seen it now down the gas chamber with you oh wait cant do that anymore hmmm cruse missile through the window then
"as a non Londoner I see a lot which makes me glad I don't live in the area and Khan's ethnic background or religious leanings don't make the top of the list at all. "
I felt you were playing the racism card for no real reason and as I said my reply was ill phrased.
www.suffolkgazette.com
Khan is the better candidate than SH. I don't live in London but my children do, so I go there often enough to see the changes in the last 30 years or so. Khan is the least controversial compared to red Ken and corrupted BJ. Policing has always been a tricky job. Mark Rowley is the least worst police commissioner for London. Air quality has been slowly improving. Rubbish in the street is better collected. Buses run better. Children playgrounds are better equipped and maintained. About ulez, i can see some people don't want to lose their old running diesel cars but they don't breathe the rubbish that their old cars leave behind, the poor flat dwellers living next to the street do. In weekdays, the fumes even got to children playground. Ulez should have been done a long time ago.
He made it clear that neither race nor religion were anywhere near his agenda, but you persist with the slur.
My children live there. Ulez is the most noticeable policy. Only a tiny number of Londoners pay ULEZ charge but everyone must breathe the rubbish that those cars leave behind their tail pipes.
Because it was so clearly expressed.
Widely hated? What utter nonsense when he has just been so overwhelmingly re-elected. He hasn't allowed knife crime to become endemic. He, like the police commissioners is made impotent by what is allowed to do anything about it, such as the accusations of institutional racism, numerically controlled stop and search and public intervention preventing the police from doing their job. This specific knife crime problem here goes back over four decades through various council leaders, mayors and multiple police commissioners, so why is Sadiq now being so targetted for criticism? And why no targetting of the West Midlands where knife crime is far more out of control and long has been?
And you accuse me of playing the race card when that is precisely what you seem to be doing to express your own blatant racism and bigotry.
The evidence for ULEZ is abundant in the thousands of premature deaths every year due to air pollution which have increasingly been due to traffic exhaust fumes. Once it was realised that those deaths included the young childen dying from asthma it was time that we took urgent action. That action long precedes Sadiq Khan, it was specifically one of the reason for the introduction of the congestion charge dating from 2003 and why we've long had a low emissions program. It's a battle we are winning by only buying zero emission buses (and doubling their numbers, a Sadiq Khan achievement), reaching 60% of London Taxis being electric now, pricing the dirtiest private cars and vans off the road, encouraging e-car ownership.
I have a lot of data from DEFRA who are charged with monitoring the air quality across the United Kingdom and that shows that in terms of Nitrogen Oxides, PM10 particulates and PM2.5 particulates, we have seen at least a 45% reduction in these since 1990. Much of that is due to the abandonment of coal fired power generation, but huge amounts of it are down to the better control of exhaust gasses, predominantly in heavy vehicles. It is now certainly true that modern vehicles release more particulates from their brakes and tyres than they do from their tailpipes, and huge amounts of these and NOX come from heating systems and building sites. Cars were only ever a minor issue.
wintoncentre.maths.cam.ac.uk
The frequency of marches we have long suffered, a curse of being the capital city. Even the huge anti nuclear weapons ones of the 1960s were hardly the first of them. Oswald Moseley's widely supported pro Nazi ones of the 1930s for example hardly filled our large Jewish population with confidence a lifetime before Sadiq Khan was even born.
traffic fumes in London is not a minor issue. You know that emissions from power stations don't affect inhabitants in the same way traffic fumes do. Furthermore, there is a huge difference of harm suffered by those who live next to the streets and those who live next to the parks. You wouldn't want to do your morning run along Bow Road in London for example, even if you just need to reach Victoria Park. My son ended up in hospital with asthma attack before they moved house from Bow Road to 'the flats'.
Of course a charge of twelve pounds a day results in cars being dumped. What else would the care worker on minimum wage do when her car suddenly was subjected to a retrospective tax (retrospective in the sense that having bought a diesel after government encouragement in the Blair years, it suddenly caused her a £3000 a year fine for daring to use it to visit her helpless old, people. I wonder how many of the economically inactive care worker population gave up because they could no longer afford to go to work?
