So who do you want to be the next Mayor of London?

[Theinjuredcleaner]

It's Count Binface/Lord Buckethead for me. I don't think he could do a worse job than his predecessors.

Have you considered the freedom for people to live on a street free from pollution, or is it only your freedom to pollute that is important?

In that case, you should ban cars entirely in London. Virtually all roads have people living on them. And haven't you ever heard of wind. FFS we get Saharan dust on our bins sometimes.

Driving is nothing like smoking or heroin. There is no benefit to smoking or heroin. There is no point to them. Driving serves a purpose

No it wasn’t. Shapps wrote to the mayor about Khan’s then existing expansion to the n and s circulars. It’s got nothing to do with the further expansion. This is a massive lie that’s been doing the rounds and seems to rise from its grave time and again despite being shown to be a falsehood.

Its amazing how often libertarians want liberties for themselves to do whatever they please, but are less happy if other people want their own freedoms.

Every area is worse, because the number of cars keeps increasing

@NeverDropYourMooncup did you not understand the summary or read the report.

No, the expansion to the whole of Greater l London was not "forced as a condition of funding".

Khan was asked to bring forward his previously-announced expansion to the N&S circulars as a condition of funding. Nothing to do with this latest expansion, which is the one that we have been talking about.

Thank you @WhatsTheUseOfWorrying for also explaining this.

It is possible, that somewhere between the extreme of allowing everyone to drive anything everywhere because freedom, and allowing no one to drive anything anywhere, there is a sensible middle road.

After all a poster earlier in this thread stated that everyone would like to live on quieter streets, isn't that an aim we should all be working towards?

That’s only true of absolutists. Everyone is a libertarian to some extent. You wouldn’t want to be arbitrarily arrested and held in secret. You wouldn’t want your privacy invaded at the whim of someone else. You wouldn’t want to be stopped walking in public places for no good reason.

I just think blocking public roads to vehicles has no proper justification. But I’m not against speed limits, licences or MOTs.

It’s amazing how quickly authoritarian points of view melt away when a restriction affects the finger wagger.

If everyone is a libertarian, then it is a bit daft to announce oneself as one then isn't it?

But who gets freedom?

You could argue that pedestrians should have right of way over cars.

Its a choice to give cars priority.

I agree with with fresh clean air.

I always used to feel ill going into the London and I'm so glad busses are going green and so on.

However I also feel people should be able to afford to access the culture and history of thier capital city..
Unfortunately with eye watering train fares and now free car access on Sundays cutoff many families in 20/30/ 40 mile radius and further will not be able to visit the nhm or see Westminster or experience the glory of our capital city.

If you can afford a car, you are clearly more important than someone walking.

Also but road tax.

Well yes. But it’s useful to frame a point of view. Some people talk about liberty, others talk in the language of human rights.

Since we all believe in rights one way or another it’s a bit daft to rely on the idea of them.

Pedestrians and cars co-exist. That’s what roads and pavements are for. You can find them being used together in a surprising number of places, here and elsewhere in the world.

This is a really odd post. People who own cars also walk on pavements.

So presumably no one would object to the pavement continuing as far as someone might need to walk then?

Then why do so many car drivers seem to insist on parking on pavements?

But the allocation of space and the prioritisation of one over the other is a choice.

In the street where I grew up in the 80s there was more space on the pavements because there were fewer cars. Now the size and number of cars makes it less safe for children to walk because they can’t be seen.

In many London streets cars have to park on the pavement to allow through traffic.

Personally I love driving and cycling and walking, but they aren’t always compatible with each other and if houses built for no cars need street parking for 2 big cars that makes an impact, and the decision about how to manage that involves deliberate choice.

I

I've never seen that...well not often at all. Quite a few roads in London actually have markings which tells you to park half on the road/half on the pavement. Actual drivers parking illegally on the pavement is not something I see.

Oddly in most of the country it isn't illegal to park on the pavement.

Here if there's no markings to tell you that you can park on the pavement, you will get a ticket f your wheel is on the pavement. Are you not in London?

If you can afford a car you can afford the £12.50 ULEZ charge once in a blue moon to drive into London and visit the museums. It’s hardly cripplingly expensive.

I think the idea that anyone who owns a car must be well off is so outdated it's laughable.

I live in London, I’m a nurse who works shifts, early starts, late finishes and nights.
If I catch a bus to work it takes me 1.5 hours if I drive 20-30 mins.
I literally would not be able to do my job if I didn’t drive as I need to get to and from work in time to pick and drop kids at school. Also given I do a 12.5hr nigh shift forgive me for driving and getting home in 20 mins so I have time to sleep before getting up to do another 12.5hr nightshift.
Not everywhere in London has buses that run every 10-15 mins. My bus goes twice an hour but I then have to connect to other buses or trains. The Ulez has had major financial impact on us and given we are surrounded by woods and open fields on one side I doubt it’s had any effect on our air quality

Jeez, so many posters who think running a car makes you Mr Toad or some Hollywood starlet racing around in a flashy sports car.

A car is a necessity for many.

I really don’t think it’s about visiting museums. It’s about managing family, home life and work.