| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Khan's hated ULEZ expansion had NO impact on air pollution while raking in millions. | |
| Posted by: | Simon Hayes | |
| Date/Time: | 28/10/25 14:17:00 |
| The grooming scandal is being extraordinarily badly handled by the government, so Khan’s repeated denials only presaged that. One wonders if the areas where the worst gangs have operated might also be strong Labour voting ones. The Mayor of London position is a nonsense. I used to attend MQTs in a professional capacity with both Livingstone and Johnson. Ken was simply batty (he really did think he was ‘Mr London’) and also deeply paranoid about the press. Not surprising since the battering he got in GLC days. Johnson was exactly as he was as PM. Big statements but zero details when looked into. Lots of promises that turned out empty and inevitable waste of taxpayer money on vanity projects like the Garden Bridge. Khan is proving equally poor. He gets an unbelievably easy ride he gets from most media, particularly the BBC, and the lack of scrutiny of his operation is bad for Londoners. When he stood last year he campaigned on how great it would be for London to have a Labour Mayor and Labour government. How’s that turned out Sadiq? Told to increase TfL fares from now on, a lack of funding from central government for promised infrastructure projects and given a knighthood to keep him quiet. The TfL settlement he took from Starmer was half what he kept demanding from the previous government despite the economic circumstances being identical (the so-called fiscal black hole was already there before the 2024 General Election but Labour chose not to mention it because the inevitable tax rises would have dissuaded a section of voters from supporting Starmer.) Things will not improve in London despite what Khan and others say. Doing business in the capital is becoming increasingly expensive and moving goods and people around increasingly difficult. That some think riding a bike is the answer to everything simply illustrates the childish thinking now prevalent in political debate. |