Off Topic The Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Should the UK remain a part of the EU or leave?

  • Stay in

    Votes: 56 47.9%
  • Get out

    Votes: 61 52.1%

  • Total voters
    117
  • Poll closed .
So not about taxes, not about having a voice on certain subjects, unless of course you really have a problem with anti racism... can’t be about his sporting achievements as his record in his chosen sport is second to none....

Why do myths have to be debunked before we get even close to people admitting their real objection to Lewis Hamilton. Why would people hide their reasons?
You have now become boring Will. We started off with Farage and you seemed to have turned the debate in to a BLM rally.
When you look at the tw2ts who have been knighted or become Lord this and that it’s laughable. Olly Robbins who was a Brexit failure and colluded with the EU is now a Sir yet Nigel Farage who has been probably the most influential politician in many years gets snubbed? Still let’s give a knighthood to some five minute wonder.
 
Lockdown cycle lanes could now be ripped up across the UK after High Court ruled Sadiq Khan's 'Streetspace' scheme was UNLAWFUL and 'took advantage of the pandemic' to push through 'radical changes' to London's streets
  • Sadiq Khan criticised for 'superficial' and 'seriously flawed' planning by judge
  • Streetspace aimed to use pandemic to justify permanent changes, court found
  • A lawyer in the case said the scheme and others like it could now be scrapped
  • Cycle lanes and other schemes will stay pending Transport for London's appeal
By Rory Tingle and James Robinson for MailOnline

Published: 00:20 AEDT, 21 January 2021 | Updated: 05:04 AEDT, 21 Janu
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-judge-Londons-High-Court-rules.html#comments


Lockdown cycle lanes could now be ripped up across the UK after the High Court ruled Sadiq Khan's 'Streetspace' scheme was unlawful.

The controversial scheme, which saw roads closed and others narrowed to create new cycle lanes in the height of lockdown last year, was found to be 'seriously flawed' by a High Court judge today.

The ruling means similar schemes implemented by councils up and down the country could now be scrapped, a lawyer in the case revealed.

However bosses at Transport for London, who described the ruling as 'disappointing', insist they will keep the make-shift cycle lanes while they appeal today's damning judgment.

It comes after Justice Lang ruled London's 'Streetspace' scheme was 'seriously flawed' and 'took advantage of the pandemic' to push through 'radical' and permanent changes to London's roads.

The judgment follows a legal challenge by organisations representing black cab drivers who were angry about being banned from a new bus-only route on the A10 in Bishopsgate.

Justice Lang said the A10 scheme treated cab drivers unfairly and should be abolished.

But her judgment also called for an end to the Mayor's wider Streetspace initiative, including the introduction of several hundred miles of temporary cycle lanes.

The lanes sparked criticism from motorists for increasing congestion, and one on Kensington High Street was removed late last year following a local outcry.

You must log in or register to see images


+5
Sadiq Khan was today criticised for 'superficial' and 'seriously flawed' planning by a judge

You must log in or register to see images


+5
Justice Lang said the A10 scheme treated cab drivers unfairly and should be abolished, but her judgment also called for an end to the Mayor's wider Streetspace initiative, including the introduction of temporary cycle lanes. Pictured is one on Euston Road

In addition to cycle lanes, Streetspace - which was put in place last May - saw the implementation of bus gates, banned turns and restricted access to streets in Low Traffic Neighbourhoods across London with the aim of encouraging walking and cycling.

In her judgement, Justice Lang called Streetspace an 'ill-considered response' which sought to 'take advantage of the pandemic to push through, on an emergency basis without consultation, 'radical changes' to London's streets.

She added: 'The scale and ambition of the proposals, and the manner in which they were described, strongly suggest that the Mayor and TfL intended that these schemes would become permanent, once the temporary orders expired.

'However, there is no evidence to suggest that there will be a permanent pandemic requiring continuation of the extreme measures introduced by the Government in 2020.'

RELATED ARTICLES
Share this article
Share
Today's judgement follows a legal challenge by the Licensed Taxi Drivers Association (LTDA) and United Trade Action Group (UTAG) against the decision to ban cab drivers from the new Bishopsgate Bus Gate scheme.

The scheme was part of plans to make the area one of the largest car-free zones in any capital city in the world.

In the lengthy and detailed judgement, Mrs Justice Lang, underlined a series of failings by TfL and the Mayor, describing their decision-making process as 'seriously flawed', with the decision to exclude taxis being based on 'superficial' and 'inadequate evidence.'

The judge noted that denying taxis access to London's roads could have 'severe consequences' for passengers who cannot walk, cycle, or use public transport and that 'the needs of people with protected characteristics, including the elderly or disabled', were 'not considered'.

You must log in or register to see images


+5
A similar lane on Kensington High Street was removed following an outcry from motorists and local businesses

You must log in or register to see images


+5
Mr Khan oversaw the rapid construction of a cycling network using temporary plastic bollards

The court also highlighted the inadequacy of the Equalities Impact Assessment (EIA) undertaken by TfL, describing parts as 'perfunctory or non-existent' and finding that it 'read as if its purpose was to justify the decision already taken'.

The judge also found taxi drivers had a legitimate expectation that they would be able to access bus lanes to ply for hire effectively, which had been unlawfully breached.

This expectation was supported by TfL's own Bus Lane Policy, which asserts that taxis 'fulfil demands that cannot be met by the bus, train or tube', and by previous Mayoral statements on the importance of taxi access to bus lanes.

Lawyers for the Defendants argued breaching this expectation was justified by the pandemic, but Justice Lang found it 'unfair and contrary to good administration to use the pandemic as a justification for restricting taxis access to bus lanes'.

Finding the treatment of taxis was irrational, the Judge described excluding taxis as an 'ill-considered response', which 'sought to take advantage of the pandemic' to push through 'radical changes' which 'far exceeded what was reasonably required'.

Steve McNamara, general secretary of the LTDA, said: 'It's fantastic to see the Judge rightly recognising the key role licensed taxis play in our great City.

'This is an extremely important judgement for London's hard working taxi drivers and the passengers who rely on them.'

You must log in or register to see images


+5
Today's judgement follows a legal challenge by the Licensed Taxi Drivers Association (LTDA) and United Trade Action Group (UTAG) against the decision to ban cab drivers from a new bus lane in Bishopsgate (pictured is the road shortly before the works were completed)

Darren Rogers, of Chiltern Law, who acted on behalf of the claimants, said: 'This was a hard fought and complicated Judicial Review where the regulated took on the regulator and sets a precedent when authorities close roads without proper analysis and care.

'Untramelled discretion must be scrutinised and reviewed. Mrs Justice Lang's judgement lays bare the unlawfulness of Streetspace as a plan and in practice.

'This sets a very decent precedent for similar schemes being challenged in other parts of the country.'

TfL said: 'We are disappointed with the court's ruling and are seeking to appeal this judgment.

'Temporary Streetspace schemes are enabling safer essential journeys during this exceptionally challenging time and are vital to ensuring that increased car traffic does not threaten London's recovery from coronavirus.

'We absolutely recognise the need for schemes such as our Bishopsgate corridor to work for the communities they serve and have worked hard to ensure that people across London, including those who use taxis, can continue to get to where they need to be.

'We also recognise the need for schemes to be delivered in a fair and consistent manner and have worked closely with the boroughs to create clear guidance for implementing schemes, updating this regularly to reflect what we have learnt. These schemes will stay in place pending our appeal.'

In actual fact according to the judgement, TFL have no right to appeal.
They are applying to the Court of Appeal for leave to appeal i.e. permission to allow TFL to lodge an appeal.

Some of the schemes are dangerous to pedestrians, motorists and even cyclists. It's a money-making scam from Khan. In addition, there are a series of cameras catching motorists with temporary restrictions all in the name of Covid. Only problem now is that we the taxpayer will be forking out for the restrictions to be scrapped and the bollards/cones to be removed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kiwiqpr
Labour announces that it will make more housing announcements this year
Luke Malpass05:00, Jan 22 2021
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Whats App
  • Reddit
  • Email



Home loan rates through the decades
Homes used to cost a lot less, but in previous decades home loan interest rates were much higher.

Video Player is loading.











Homes used to cost a lot less, but in previous decades home loan interest rates were much higher.
OPINION: It was very much business as usual for the well oiled Labour machine in its first public outing of the year – a caucus retreat in Nelson. The Prime Minister kicked off the year by giving her team a pep talk while also delivering a stern warning about how tough Covid was going to continue to make life difficult.

Then she and most of her top tier ministers – Grant Robertson, Chris Hipkins and Megan Woods – trooped out to the Nelson suburb of Richmond to show off a new well-built row of Kainga Ora state houses.

While there she reannounced the fact that the Government was building loads of new state houses, but it has now also made decisions and produced some promotional material about where they will all go. Labour has identified nine areas of urgent need where the building will be focussed – all in the North Island.

Then Ardern announced when the rest of the Government’s housing announcements this year will be.


READ MORE:
* Government forecasts five years of big house price growth but there is some good news
* Coronavirus: Government to deliver 'rainy day' Budget for the ages today
* Andrew Little: Time for excuses over, time to build houses

You must log in or register to see images

BRADEN FASTIER / STUFF/Nelson Mail
Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and key Labour MPs visits a Kainga Ora home in Richmond, during the away Labour Caucus in Nelson.
By Late February, there will be announcements on proposed demand-side measures that the Treasury has been busily working on. Robertson also confirmed on that the Government expects to respond to the Reserve Bank’s suggestions for extra tools to cool the housing market (such as through debt-to-income ratios).


In February the Government will also announce “high-level” decisions around the Resource Management Act and expects to have an exposure draft of the first Bill released in May

In May the Budget will also contain “further measures to address supply”.

Then in July the National Policy Statement on urban development that requires councils to do a stocktake on available land kicks in.

It is testament to the political nightmare this issue has now become, that Labour feels the need to do an announcement on future announcements. Its political purpose is to reassure the public that work is in fact being done.

In the meantime, Labour likes to conflate its public housing building programme with the broader issue of house prices. State houses are about providing houses for those on limited means, while house prices are about Kiwis – and first time homebuyers in particular – ability to buy a house.

And, Labour could be forgiven for feeling a bit hard done by: the underlying conditions that have created last year's 20 per cent house price increases have been created by successive Government of both stripes and then exacerbated by Covid-19.

But one of Labour’s key election promises in 2017 was to boost housing supply, in part building 100,000 private houses over 10 years through Kiwibuild. Nothing close to that materialised.

Practically, it is very difficult to see what measures Labour can take that will ease house price rises in the near term, unless its “demand-side” measures are Draconian. Managing demand would realistically have to involve rationing credit in some way, or simply barring some people (say property investors who own more than two homes) from buying houses for a set period of time until things cool off.

But neither of these options are ideal and each carries political risks for Labour.

Increasing supply – generally considered to be the real structural solution – will take years to have a significant impact to stabilise price rises.

2021 is shaping up as the political year of the house.

More from
Luke Malpass • Political Editor

[email protected]
 
Lockdown cycle lanes could now be ripped up across the UK after High Court ruled Sadiq Khan's 'Streetspace' scheme was UNLAWFUL and 'took advantage of the pandemic' to push through 'radical changes' to London's streets
  • Sadiq Khan criticised for 'superficial' and 'seriously flawed' planning by judge
  • Streetspace aimed to use pandemic to justify permanent changes, court found
  • A lawyer in the case said the scheme and others like it could now be scrapped
  • Cycle lanes and other schemes will stay pending Transport for London's appeal
By Rory Tingle and James Robinson for MailOnline

Published: 00:20 AEDT, 21 January 2021 | Updated: 05:04 AEDT, 21 Janu
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-judge-Londons-High-Court-rules.html#comments


Lockdown cycle lanes could now be ripped up across the UK after the High Court ruled Sadiq Khan's 'Streetspace' scheme was unlawful.

The controversial scheme, which saw roads closed and others narrowed to create new cycle lanes in the height of lockdown last year, was found to be 'seriously flawed' by a High Court judge today.

The ruling means similar schemes implemented by councils up and down the country could now be scrapped, a lawyer in the case revealed.

However bosses at Transport for London, who described the ruling as 'disappointing', insist they will keep the make-shift cycle lanes while they appeal today's damning judgment.

It comes after Justice Lang ruled London's 'Streetspace' scheme was 'seriously flawed' and 'took advantage of the pandemic' to push through 'radical' and permanent changes to London's roads.

The judgment follows a legal challenge by organisations representing black cab drivers who were angry about being banned from a new bus-only route on the A10 in Bishopsgate.

Justice Lang said the A10 scheme treated cab drivers unfairly and should be abolished.

But her judgment also called for an end to the Mayor's wider Streetspace initiative, including the introduction of several hundred miles of temporary cycle lanes.

The lanes sparked criticism from motorists for increasing congestion, and one on Kensington High Street was removed late last year following a local outcry.

You must log in or register to see images


+5
Sadiq Khan was today criticised for 'superficial' and 'seriously flawed' planning by a judge

You must log in or register to see images


+5
Justice Lang said the A10 scheme treated cab drivers unfairly and should be abolished, but her judgment also called for an end to the Mayor's wider Streetspace initiative, including the introduction of temporary cycle lanes. Pictured is one on Euston Road

In addition to cycle lanes, Streetspace - which was put in place last May - saw the implementation of bus gates, banned turns and restricted access to streets in Low Traffic Neighbourhoods across London with the aim of encouraging walking and cycling.

In her judgement, Justice Lang called Streetspace an 'ill-considered response' which sought to 'take advantage of the pandemic to push through, on an emergency basis without consultation, 'radical changes' to London's streets.

She added: 'The scale and ambition of the proposals, and the manner in which they were described, strongly suggest that the Mayor and TfL intended that these schemes would become permanent, once the temporary orders expired.

'However, there is no evidence to suggest that there will be a permanent pandemic requiring continuation of the extreme measures introduced by the Government in 2020.'

RELATED ARTICLES
Share this article
Share
Today's judgement follows a legal challenge by the Licensed Taxi Drivers Association (LTDA) and United Trade Action Group (UTAG) against the decision to ban cab drivers from the new Bishopsgate Bus Gate scheme.

The scheme was part of plans to make the area one of the largest car-free zones in any capital city in the world.

In the lengthy and detailed judgement, Mrs Justice Lang, underlined a series of failings by TfL and the Mayor, describing their decision-making process as 'seriously flawed', with the decision to exclude taxis being based on 'superficial' and 'inadequate evidence.'

The judge noted that denying taxis access to London's roads could have 'severe consequences' for passengers who cannot walk, cycle, or use public transport and that 'the needs of people with protected characteristics, including the elderly or disabled', were 'not considered'.

You must log in or register to see images


+5
A similar lane on Kensington High Street was removed following an outcry from motorists and local businesses

You must log in or register to see images


+5
Mr Khan oversaw the rapid construction of a cycling network using temporary plastic bollards

The court also highlighted the inadequacy of the Equalities Impact Assessment (EIA) undertaken by TfL, describing parts as 'perfunctory or non-existent' and finding that it 'read as if its purpose was to justify the decision already taken'.

The judge also found taxi drivers had a legitimate expectation that they would be able to access bus lanes to ply for hire effectively, which had been unlawfully breached.

This expectation was supported by TfL's own Bus Lane Policy, which asserts that taxis 'fulfil demands that cannot be met by the bus, train or tube', and by previous Mayoral statements on the importance of taxi access to bus lanes.

Lawyers for the Defendants argued breaching this expectation was justified by the pandemic, but Justice Lang found it 'unfair and contrary to good administration to use the pandemic as a justification for restricting taxis access to bus lanes'.

Finding the treatment of taxis was irrational, the Judge described excluding taxis as an 'ill-considered response', which 'sought to take advantage of the pandemic' to push through 'radical changes' which 'far exceeded what was reasonably required'.

Steve McNamara, general secretary of the LTDA, said: 'It's fantastic to see the Judge rightly recognising the key role licensed taxis play in our great City.

'This is an extremely important judgement for London's hard working taxi drivers and the passengers who rely on them.'

You must log in or register to see images


+5
Today's judgement follows a legal challenge by the Licensed Taxi Drivers Association (LTDA) and United Trade Action Group (UTAG) against the decision to ban cab drivers from a new bus lane in Bishopsgate (pictured is the road shortly before the works were completed)

Darren Rogers, of Chiltern Law, who acted on behalf of the claimants, said: 'This was a hard fought and complicated Judicial Review where the regulated took on the regulator and sets a precedent when authorities close roads without proper analysis and care.

'Untramelled discretion must be scrutinised and reviewed. Mrs Justice Lang's judgement lays bare the unlawfulness of Streetspace as a plan and in practice.

'This sets a very decent precedent for similar schemes being challenged in other parts of the country.'

TfL said: 'We are disappointed with the court's ruling and are seeking to appeal this judgment.

'Temporary Streetspace schemes are enabling safer essential journeys during this exceptionally challenging time and are vital to ensuring that increased car traffic does not threaten London's recovery from coronavirus.

'We absolutely recognise the need for schemes such as our Bishopsgate corridor to work for the communities they serve and have worked hard to ensure that people across London, including those who use taxis, can continue to get to where they need to be.

'We also recognise the need for schemes to be delivered in a fair and consistent manner and have worked closely with the boroughs to create clear guidance for implementing schemes, updating this regularly to reflect what we have learnt. These schemes will stay in place pending our appeal.'

Not sure what the issue is really. He runs London he should be able to do what he wants to the London public spaces.
 
He has to act within the law, he hasn't quite got the gist of it yet...

I only had a quick read but all he's done is changed the roads so there's bike lanes and closed some roads off. To be honest where i live they added bus lanes and traffics got **** for cars but if he's reducing pollution and just changing the city roads i don't see the problem.

Just taxi drivers moaning about their trade (well i saw it was there Union or something) as congestion will affect them. I guess everyone has a say in this country. Why things like new house building is a struggle and other things. I hate beauracracy myself even if i understand some of it needs to be around
 
I only had a quick read but all he's done is changed the roads so there's bike lanes and closed some roads off. To be honest where i live they added bus lanes and traffics got **** for cars but if he's reducing pollution and just changing the city roads i don't see the problem.

Just taxi drivers moaning about their trade (well i saw it was there Union or something) as congestion will affect them. I guess everyone has a say in this country. Why things like new house building is a struggle and other things. I hate beauracracy myself even if i understand some of it needs to be around

No problem if there's consultation and a majority want it but there's been none. I live in a road that is part of a LTN, before the closures it was a quiet side road but now is a rat run for traffic trying to dodge huge jams on the main roads nearby. Pollution on the main roads has increased and other roads become jammed at busy times, the only plan the council had was that traffic would reduce as people became so fed up with the congestion but before this lockdown it was as bad as ever.

Emergency services throughout London have been severely affected by both congestion and various road closures needing long detours, if you don't live in London you really have little idea of how f*cked up traffic is throughout...
 
  • Like
Reactions: BobbyD and kiwiqpr
You have now become boring Will. We started off with Farage and you seemed to have turned the debate in to a BLM rally.
When you look at the tw2ts who have been knighted or become Lord this and that it’s laughable. Olly Robbins who was a Brexit failure and colluded with the EU is now a Sir yet Nigel Farage who has been probably the most influential politician in many years gets snubbed? Still let’s give a knighthood to some five minute wonder.

When did I say it was BLM ? I’m yet to understand why people have such objections to a British born sportsman who has achieved more than any other in his field a knighthood when others don’t meet such anger. I’ve shown and you confirmed the living abroad and not paying U.K tax on all their earnings is an attempt to mislead, I’ve demonstrated that it can’t be that others have been active in social issues, so it can’t be that unless you consider anti racism, which I can’t believe, is a bad thing so what is it and why all this deception. It seems very odd.

Time will tell on Farage if he was a force for good or not, just because you think so doesn’t make it so. there have been a lot of influential politicians over the years who you’d never consider for honours, and remember this man was successfully sued for defamation against a group called hope not hate!!
 
What does “this week’s orange” mean? Google suggested nothing.

According to Ellers. Anyone who shows any interest in social and societal issues doesn’t really care and just jumps on the latest bandwagon, a good example of this would be Major Tom and the NHS. As helping and appreciating the NHS was the new orange.
 
According to Ellers. Anyone who shows any interest in social and societal issues doesn’t really care and just jumps on the latest bandwagon, a good example of this would be Major Tom and the NHS. As helping and appreciating the NHS was the new orange.

Oh. Weird phrase still.

The government could try not doing **** things to create bandwagons to jump onto.
 
According to Ellers. Anyone who shows any interest in social and societal issues doesn’t really care and just jumps on the latest bandwagon, a good example of this would be Major Tom and the NHS. As helping and appreciating the NHS was the new orange.
Oh my god our resident activist is on a yoghurt knitting exercise. Stop talking utter tosh.
Many people have been knighted for doing nothing, in fact I noticed you avoided the failures of Oliver Robbins and his collusion’s with EU officials? Funny that? You are also against Nigel Farage receiving one. Who by the way is probably the most influential political figure in this country in the last 20 years. You say they are many influential figures over the years that haven’t received one... name one that has been more influential than him?
You are also trying to turn this debate in to something to do with race which it nothing to do with. Throw in two white names and if they are hypocritical has Hamilton then I will say the same.
Silly lefty.