Tag Archives: Sadiq Khan

Should I Invest in Oil and/or Buy a New Car?

Posted on by
5

The stock market is quiescent and it is time to ponder questions such as should I buy more BP shares and should I buy an electric or hybrid car? There is an article in the FT today on the rejection of resolutions focussed on climate change at the ExxonMobil and Chevron annual meetings. It said: “shareholders solidly rejected climate change proposals at the US oil majors’ annual meetings on Wednesday, scaling back support from last year and splitting with results at peers in Europe where resolutions related to global warming have won stronger support. Only 11 per cent of Exxon shareholders supported a petition calling for the company to set emissions reduction targets that would be consistent with the goals of the 2015 Paris climate agreement. A similar proposal at Chevron received less than 10 per cent support”. See FT article here: https://www.ft.com/content/7faccadc-beef-4b10-be53-ae7aceaeafce

Resolutions on this subject at the BP and Shell AGMs were similarly defeated even though many institutional holders like to promote their green credentials.

Individual shareholders need to make up their own minds on how to vote on whether to put companies like BP and Shell out of business by stopping their oil development activities. Both BP and Shell argue for a transition to renewable energy at a pace acceptable to their customers and which does not impose unreasonable short-term costs and I agree with them. The transition to renewable energy for many purposes may make sense but for transportation carbon fuels have a very high energy intensity and the infrastructure to support electric vehicles means a high loss in the transmission system.

I have a pressing personal decision to make on this issue. My diesel-powered Jaguar XF is almost ten years old now and I like to buy a new car when they have done more than 60,000 miles as they get more unreliable and expensive to maintain after that. I don’t do many miles now so a somewhat smaller car might make some sense. But should it be an electric vehicle, a hybrid or a petrol/diesel one?

I think a hybrid is the best bet and have booked a test drive of a Toyota Corolla. They are self-charging hybrids but can only run a short distance on battery power so I am betting that petrol will be readily available for at least the next ten years.

I am surprised that Jaguar are still selling XF models but they do now have a petrol option and a “sportbrake” version which probably shows how well liked the car is but I fear that diesel will be discouraged by regulation soon.

They do sell all-electric models now but they are expensive and are bulky SUV style cars when I prefer smaller vehicles. Note that the environmental benefits of electric cars over petrol ones are quite marginal if you take the all-in lifetime environmental impact costs into account and the latest scare is that the heavier weight of electric vehicles is causing damage to our roads – thus explaining why there are so many potholes in our roads of late. The weight of current electric batteries is becoming a major problem while the production and recycling of batteries is a negative aspect not yet confronted.

Electric cars are cheaper than they used to be but they either have limited range or are expensive (£43,000 to £58,000 for a Tesla Model 3 for example, or over £70,000 for a Jaguar I-Pace).

Readers of this article can suggest alternatives for me to look at. Use the comment box below.

I could of course hold on to my current vehicle for another few years in the hope that Sadiq Khan changes his mind on the ULEZ expansion (my Jaguar XF is not compliant) or is not elected again next May. There are several strong contenders lining up to take him on. But I do so few miles within the ULEZ area (current and future) that it does not bother me much what the Mayor decides to do. Whatever he decides he is bound to be wrong based on his past decision record.

Roger Lawson (Twitter: https://twitter.com/RogerWLawson  )

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

Breathe Book Review – Sadiq Khan’s Memoir

Posted on by
1

Sadiq Khan has published a book entitled Breathe. It is partly biographical and partly a polemic about air pollution and climate change.

He explains how he became interested in air pollution in London after training for the London marathon and developing “late-onset” asthma. He blames it solely on London’s poor air quality in the streets on which he trained.

He also covers the case of Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah but misreports what the coroner said about the cause of her death. Air pollution was probably a contributory factor as she lived near the South Circular which is very heavily polluted but certainly not the sole cause.

He also makes inaccurate comments about the Blackwall Tunnel suggesting that the bends in the tunnel were designed so that horses did not bolt for the exit when they saw the daylight. I have seen this allegation about the Rotherhithe Tunnel which also has sharp bends but I doubt it is true. Wikipedia says the Blackwall tunnel has bends in order that the tunnel could align with Northumberland Wharf to the north and Ordnance Wharf to the south, and avoid a sewer underneath Bedford Street.

The book attempts to link air pollution to action on climate change but does not provide any evidence to support that. Indeed the book is short on supporting data and is hardly a scientific exposition of the issues.

Neither does Sadiq Khan look at the economic cost of his policies and why a lot of the justification was the need to bail out TfL by raising taxes via such schemes as the ULEZ.  He claims that the ULEZ had a major impact on the air pollution in London while ignoring the impact of central Government policies, the improvements to vehicles and the impact of the pandemic on reducing traffic.

But he does explain how scaring the population by emphasising the negative health impacts of air pollution has helped him to win election.

On the issue of LTNs, he alleges that the vocal public opposition has been stimulated by hostile media while arguing the bulk of residents support them. How wrong he is!

He covers his recent alleged heart attack in Glasgow and it’s difficult not to conclude from the length he spends on his medical problems that he is a hypochondriac.

The book will only be of interest to those who want an explanation of how Sadiq Khan got elected as Mayor of London by scaremongering about air pollution and climate change. But he does point out the weaknesses and mistakes of his opponents. Hopefully new candidates can learn from this book.

Roger Lawson

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

Two Petitions We Supported to be Debated in Parliament

Posted on by
4

The two petitions are requesting the revoking of powers to charge for CAZ, LEZ and ULEZ schemes and amend the 1999 GLA Act to remove the Mayor of London’s powers to impose road user charging.

Both petitions got enough signatures to justify debates in Parliament which will take place on the 26th June. Please encourage your MP to attend and give their views.

These may appear to be technical matters but this legislation has enabled local councils and Sadiq Khan to raise very large amounts of tax which are totally unjustified.

Don’t let MPs fob you off with excuses about the need to cut traffic congestion and save the planet from global warming by cutting vehicle emissions. It’s all about money, not the environment.

You should be able to watch the debates on the Parliament TV BBC Channel.

Roger Lawson

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

Howard Cox Standing for Mayor of London

Posted on by
4

Howard Cox has announced that he will be the Reform Party candidate for Mayor of London next May. As the founder of FairFuelUK which has been very active in promoting the interests of motorists, with successful campaigns, he should give Sadiq Khan a good challenge.

Mr Cox has promised to scrap the ULEZ scheme and LTNs. He will certainly get my vote and surely stands a good chance of getting a significant proportion of the votes of Londoners, particularly in outer London.

Telegraph article: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/05/09/reform-reveals-london-mayor-candidate-is-fuel-campaigner/

 Roger Lawson

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

Politics and Technology Problems

Posted on by
2

It’s been a while since I wrote a blog post. Too busy sorting out some technical problems and keeping up with medical issues – I just booked my seventh Covid vaccination which does not scare me. But I would like to comment on some topical issues.

Should Dominic Raab have been fired, or encouraged to resign, which is the same thing in reality? There is one simple question to answer which is “would you like to work for him as a boss?”. My answer would be an undoubted “no”.

Leaders who wish to get things done need to be popular to some extent at least if they wish to have people work hard and follow the policies laid down. You certainly can’t get people to do what you want by bullying them.

Raab was apparently warned several times about his behaviour so the final outcome was hardly unexpected. In any organisation, and Government is no different, you have to have consensus and leadership by example. If Raab could not get Civil Service staff to do what he wanted then he needed to change his approach.

My first technical problem was that BT and Microsoft decided to stop supporting POP email clients, for alleged security reasons after 20 years. That meant potentially losing access to thousands of older emails I have received over the last 15 years. No workarounds provided unless I paid them money. I am very unhappy about being treated in this way and Outlook on the web is not nearly as good as Outlook 2016 as a local client.

My latest technical problem was configuring and learning how to use a new Samsung smartwatch (a Galaxy 4). This is replacing an older Huawei smartwatch which did basic functions very well but was not really compatible with the Apple i-Phone I currently use. I don’t like Apple watches – too expensive and I prefer a more traditional design. The Galaxy watch is also incompatible but you have to read the very small print on their web site to discover that. You even need a Samsung phone to set it up which is ridiculous. The user interface is horribly complex and it’s taken me hours to learn all the functions and configure it. Watches should be installable in a few minutes, not hours, and all common phones should be supported.

That’s the rant over for today.

I was alerted by the new emergency phone alarm just now. I presume that’s in case Russia launches World War 3, and we get 3 minutes warning of a nuclear attack. Reminds me of the 1960s but most people decided then that there was not much to do in 3 minutes except hide under a table.

Meanwhile Sadiq Khan is pushing ahead with the ULEZ expansion despite widespread public opposition. Financially it makes no sense and it will make no difference to air quality in the outer London boroughs. There will be a legal challenge in the High Court in July but I am not very hopeful of a successful outcome. But it’s worth supporting anyway.

The only way you can remove idiots like Sadiq Kahn is at the ballot box.

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address below. You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

How Many Non-ULEZ Compliant Vehicles Drive in London?

Posted on by
2

How many people will be affected by the ULEZ expansion to outer London? This is an important question. Sadiq Khan claims only one in ten drivers (160,000 vehicles) will be affected based on counting non-compliant cars driving in London. But this is grossly misleading probably because it includes PHV/Uber cars which drive high mileages within London.

The RAC has reported the true figures. They claim nearly 700,000 cars registered in London will be affected which rises to 850,000 if vans are included. That does not even include the vehicles registered elsewhere that drive into London for commuting, shopping, etc.

These are enormous numbers and indicates the massive financial costs being imposed on potentially millions of people who will be either paying £12.50 per day or need to spend thousands of pounds on a new vehicle.

Yet again we have the Mayor of London grossly misleading people and telling porkies in his desperation to get public support for the ULEZ expansion.

See RAC Report here: https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/motoring-news/drivers-greater-london-could-be-liable-to-pay-the-ULEZ-this-summer/?  

Roger Lawson

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

Mayor Abuses Opponents of ULEZ and Conservatives Gear Up

Posted on by
1

Sadiq Khan gave a speech on Monday in which he said that while some Londoners had “genuine concerns”, others had “latched on to the ULEZ to push their own agenda”. He said: “This includes a relatively small but well organised group of climate deniers and vested interests who are playing the genuine concerns of Londoners because they sense an opportunity to put a dent in the drive towards greater climate action”. See report here: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/climate-change-deniers-emboldened-ulez-215221307.html

This is of course a gross distortion of the truth. Opposing the ULEZ expansion has nothing to do with your views on climate change. The ULEZ is claimed to tackle air pollution (but it won’t help in outer London) and there is no basis for arguing it will tackle climate change. Only the misinformed will be fooled by this nonsense. The ULEZ is solely about raising tax to cover TfL and the Mayor’s financial mismanagement.

The Conservative Party seem to have finally realised that the ULEZ expansion is a great platform on which to attack Sadiq Khan. They are promoting a petition which has already been signed by over 70,000 people. Please add your name! See https://action.conservatives.com/stop-drivers-tax/

Meanwhile the Crowdjustice legal case for a judicial review has been progressing. See https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/stop-ulez-expansion/? for the latest news. Please support it.

Roger Lawson

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

Sadiq Khan Shows His True Colours

Posted on by
1

At the People’s Question Time in Ealing on 2/3/2023 the Mayor of London showed just what he will do to try and push through his ULEZ policies. He made a number of outrageous allegations about those who oppose expansion including that they are covid and vaccine deniers and are associated with the “far right”. See video here:  https://fb.watch/j1rLkjfuto/

He got a severe barracking from the audience and quite rightly. The protesters inside and outside the hall might have been a mixed bunch of people but it is ridiculous to suggest they were extreme conspiracy theorists. It is malicious nonsense for Sadiq Khan to suggest that those who oppose the ULEZ expansion are extremists of any kind.

On a personal note, I have been campaigning against the ULEZ expansion but I certainly don’t deny the benefit of covid vaccinations – I have had 5.

To back up Sadiq Khan, the Labour Leader of Ealing Council Peter Mason said this on Twitter: “The protest outside Peoples Question Time at Ealing Town Hall tonight wasn’t an expression of freedom of speech. People from outside our borough came to our streets to spread racism, intimidation and hatred. This isn’t democracy, this is barbarism”.

Again a false demonisation of those protesting. The protesting certainly had  nothing to do with racism and all that Sadiq Khan and Peter Mason have done is to stir up hatred with unfounded allegations.

What is politics coming to when such people are allowed to generate divisions based on false claims?

Roger Lawson

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

London Congestion Charge and Smart User Road Charging Inquiry

Posted on by
Reply

We have just passed the twentieth anniversary of the introduction of the London Congestion Charge. This has been hailed as a success by TfL management and Mayor Sadiq Khan but is it? In reality it might have reduced the number of vehicles on the roads of central London as some users have been deterred or changed their travel modes or patterns, but it has not reduced congestion.

This scheme was installed in 2002 to the City and West End with a Western Extension into Kensington and Chelsea introduced in 2007 which was later removed. There is a charge per day for driving anywhere within the zone boundary. This was originally set at £5 per day but rose to £10 at the end of 2010, when the Western Extension was scrapped. It was raised to £11.50 per day from June 2014, and to £15 from June 2020 plus extended to 24 hours per day every day.

The original justification for the charge was that it would solve London’s perennial road traffic congestion (environmental benefits were not an argument used because it was known they would be minimal). But it did not solve the congestion problem with that soon returning to the same level as before and subsequently becoming a lot worse. The environmental claims made by some have also been shown to be false with air pollution within the zone basically unchanged as a result. Neither does it raise any significant funds for public transport improvements because almost all the revenue from the scheme goes in operating costs. Indeed if it was not for the accidental fines people collect from forgetting to pay the charge, it would probably lose money. Note that the Congestion Charge was introduced by socialist car-hating Mayor Ken Livingstone. It has impacted the poor more heavily than the wealthy and hence is a very regressive tax.

For more details of the data on congestion and the impact of the Congestion Charge see the reports accessible from this web page: https://www.freedomfordrivers.org/congestion

The Congestion Charge is of course a remarkably stupid system where the charge is only payable once per day however many times a vehicle drives into the zone or how far they travel. This has encouraged the use of Private Hire Vehicles and taxis which have increased enormously in numbers as a result, thus adding to congestion.

Neither does it encourage low emission vehicles or discourage high emission ones.

Nor does it discourage travel at the busiest times of day as the charge is the same whenever you travel. So there is little benefit in reducing congestion.  

Nor is there any concession to people who need to travel within the zone for medical reasons (several major London hospitals lie within the zone and although there is a refund claim system for NHS patients it is complicated to make claims).  Nor for any other people who provide essential services such as social carers or plumbers/electricians.

Now the Greater London Assembly (GLA) is holding an inquiry into Smart User Road Charging and are inviting evidence – see https://tinyurl.com/5n8h453s . The Freedom for Drivers Foundation has submitted a response to this inquiry which can be read here: https://tinyurl.com/rryz64hw

If the Mayor pushes ahead with the expanded ULEZ he will have a lot more cameras which could be used to make the Congestion Charge system more intelligent but it can never be made a really sophisticated system without a change in the technology.

There is one thing for certain though. Public reaction to road user charging will continue to be negative as it is just seen as a way to raise more tax from drivers.

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.

Government May Block ULEZ Expansion

Posted on by
1

Both the Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail have reported that the Government may block the expansion of the ULEZ to outer London. It is suggested they could use Section 143 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999. This gives the Secretary of State the power to veto the Mayor of London’s policies which are inconsistent with national transport policies (see https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1999/29/section/143 ).

Paul Scully, Transport Minister, has argued that as the ULEZ affects many people who live outside of London itself. He said “It affects a whole load of people in Surrey, Kent and Hertfordshire who didn’t get a say on it. It is taxation without representation”.

Comment: Whether Section 143 of the Act gives the requisite power to block the Mayor is legally questionable in my view but it might be worth fighting in the Courts. However, and as I have said before, as ultimately the Government has the power to change the 1999 Act, they should threaten to do so. They could simply remove the ability to introduce or continue with charging schemes. Simply threatening to do so would put the Mayor in an impossible position because he would incur very substantial costs in building the camera network which would then not be recoverable.

The Government just needs to make some tough decisions and lay down the law on this issue instead of sitting on the fence and trying to please everyone.

Roger Lawson

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Drivers_London

You can “follow” this blog by entering your email address in the box below.  You will then receive an email alerting you to new posts as they are added.