[Closed] If Gordon did what Boris has you'd be asking for his head

did no one else see the documentary about him last night?

it was rather biased but you couldnt help but agreeing he was a corrupt egomaniac

and this was borris talking about beating up a journalist
borris:
"I'll be ****ing furious if you hurt him [u]too[/u] bad"
headcase:
"No Boris - just a couple of black eyes and bruised ribs."

Meh. I'd have done the same.

London is never going to deal with freak weather that well, no-one wants to shell out for the specialist equipment to deal with stuff that hardly ever happens.

Shock horror, for 2 or 3 days every quarter century doing what you can with grit might not be enough to allow business to continue as usual. Deal with it.

Shock horror, politician dislikes attempts made to make a party political scapegoat out of them.

Shock horror, the whole non situation is whipped up into a frenzy by the media.

Turned off the documentary, it was like a party political broadcast for the opposition. I have no problems with people being criticised but that was far to one sided.

As chairman of the London Transport he is supposed to organise their daily running? What a farce. While he may well accept responsibility for his staff not sorting out a bette response (could they have MADE a better response, i am not sure?) it's not the chairmans job to be calling up to make sure everyone is working correctly. That's like suggesting the chairman of BT should be personally calling each exchange to check they're prepared for the onslaught of calls for red nose day.

And the documentary was so utterly biased as to be inadmissable as anything but propaganda by the opposition.

Snow happens, sometimes services are affected - its a fact of life.

I think the clue as to why London was so ill prepared for the snow in Feb. lies in the answer which Boris Johnson gave the committee when asked what action he had taken. "I observed that it had started to snow" he answered. Obviously the Mayor of London thinks thinks that he is a comedian and that his job is in fact, just one big comedy act.

Comedy is a fine and honourable profession, but I'm not entirely convinced it offers the best qualifications for the serious business of running one of the largest cities on earth.

I was also interested in this : [i]"he left partway through giving an answer."[/i] That is the behaviour that one would expect from a stroppy child.

So we have a person who is childish and believes that wise-cracks are the best way to deal with serious questions concerning why they didn't do what they were suppose to do, running London. And people ask why London was in a mess ? 😯

.

Shock horror, politician dislikes attempts made to make a party political scapegoat out of them.

Where exactly do you get that idea from anotherdeadhero ?

The Transport Select Committee is a cross-party committee on which the Labour Party has a majority of [u]only one.[/u]

What Boris Johnson "disliked" was being held accountable for the failure to deal with what was probably the most predicted snowfall I have ever known - my cycling club arranged for an off-road evening bike ride the week before, in anticipation of the heavy snowfalls ffs.

Here you are - from our forum 4 days before the snow arrived :

[b]** SNOWY ** mtb night ride Mon 2nf Feb
by Sylv » Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:34 am

Well hopefully

As there's been loads of interest for the return of the night rides recently, why not try kick off things with one next Monday in what should be challenging but fun conditions;

Will be a 11-mile loop starting from East Croydon station at 7.30pm.

You'll need good lights (not just small LEDs), I have one spare set to lend

Don't worry there's very little road, and fresh snow is very grippy with mtb tires

Let me know if you're coming; I'll also send an email around

If there's enough snow we can secretly ride on a golf course or two ..[/b]

What was Boris Johnson doing over the weekend before the snow arrived ? Aparantly waiting to "observe that it had started to snow"

Boris Johnson is a politician who doesn't like to be held accountable. Preferring instead, to rely on wise-cracks and storming off in a childish strop.

The people of London voted - they asked for a joke and a buffoon. In fact, and I'm disappointed for them, they got much worse.

"I ****ing told you I wouldn't be good on detail"

Yes Boris, we kinda knew that, we just didn't realise you "wouldn't be good" at anything at all...apparently, you did quite a funny article on how the weak pound was affecting your family skiing trip. Good show old chap.

T0sser.

The people of London voted - they asked for a joke and a buffoon. In fact, and I'm disappointed for them, they got much worse.

"I ****ing told you I wouldn't be good on detail"

Yes Boris, we kinda knew that, we just didn't realise you "wouldn't be good" at anything at all...apparently, you did quite a funny article on how the weak pound was affecting your family skiing trip. Good show old chap.

T0sser.

Just imagine what the Dave & George show'll be like if they win the next General Election - oh dear.

I'm waiting for Captain EveningStandard's view.

He clearly feels he doesn't have to do a good job. He knows he has a perfectly good financial safety net and no repuation to protect.

I think the clue as to why London was so ill prepared for the snow in Feb.

London is always going to be unable to cope with heavy snow. Happily it occurs on a vanishingly small number of occassions. I suggest you deal with this fact. I suspect Boris has made his peace with it too.

If heavy snow happened every winter for weeks or months at a time, yet the mayor made no effort to make provision for this, I'd agree that was grounds for dismissal.

Comedy is a fine and honourable profession, but I'm not entirely convinced it offers the best qualifications for the serious business of running one of the largest cities on earth.

If you ask a stupid question, you can't be too surprised when you get a stupid answer. I'd prefer to have a chap in charge who has the balls to do that. It was hardly insightful questioning, more a cheap shot.

I was also interested in this : "he left partway through giving an answer." That is the behaviour that one would expect from a stroppy child.

He said he'd be there for 40 minutes, he was there for 40 minutes. If the Ctte failed to make effective use of him in that time, hard luck. The man does have a city to run.

Where exactly do you get that idea from anotherdeadhero ?

If you are going to admonish someone for failing their duty, first you have to prove that they actually did fail in their duty. In jumping straight into personal sniping, I think the Ctte was more of a farce than Boris and frankly, I think he dealt with it in precisely the correct terms.

The Transport Select Committee is a cross-party committee on which the Labour Party has a majority of only one.

I'm aware of that thanks.

my cycling club arranged for an off-road evening bike ride the week before, in anticipation of the heavy snowfalls ffs.

Just becuase some guys on pushbikes can go riding in the snow, dosn't mean it is sensible to continue to operate a fleet of buses in conditions that put at significant and severe risk, the lives of hundreds of people.

It seems to me, that the mayor's office were well aware of the forecast, had set in motion all possible countermeasures, and quite rightly removed services when they proved inoperable in the conditions.

London does not exist in a bubble, immune to everything. It has to run to a budget, that budget cannot cover all possible contingencies, so those that hardly ever happen, and happen for a breif period of time rightly get set aside. London exists on planet earth, it may just have to deal with the weather like the rest of us.

Who would have thought London would elect the village idiot as the Mayor...

ShinyRedOrange - Member
Who would have thought London would elect the village idiot as the Mayor...

They did. What was incredible is that they then voted him back in again! Thankfully that was rectified at the last mayoral election and an intelligent mayor was elected instead of a buffoon pretending to be clever.

Hmmmm. Village idiot or Village crook?

Tough choice

I dont like most of Boris Johnsons policies. Ie getting rid of the western extension to the congestion zone.

But this is ridiculous. Hes right if there had been 30 accidents already shutting down the buses for 1 day was a good idea.

They were back up by Tuesday morning.

I fail to see what the problem is ? As previously mentioned 1 day lost every 25 years. Is nothing.

What do those flaming him expect him to do ?

The snow fell extremely quickly over night and as far as Im aware the even the roads that were gritted the snow covered them ?

I walked to work that day which was fine but cycling to work the next few days I felt especially vulnerable. There could be ice any where.

The whole structure of london and peoples lives in it is nt designed to cope with large snow falls.

Where there any deaths that day involving london transport vehicles (mainly buses) ? Not as far as I am aware. Job Done in my opinion if some one had died after been hit by a bus if they'd continued to run them there'd be national outrage.

Does Boris still refer to black people as "piccaninnies" with "watermelon smiles"?

I'd have to agree that since London hasn't had snow like that for almost 20 years the councils/GLA would have cut back on the equipment required to clear it.

Thankfully that was rectified at the last mayoral election and an intelligent mayor was elected instead of a buffoon pretending to be clever.

Oh CFH, an intelligent mayor would of had intelligent answers and fought his corner, but instead he behaved like a "buffoon", got up and walked out.

Oh CFH, an intelligent mayor would of had intelligent answers and fought his corner, but instead he behaved like a "buffoon", got up and walked out.

Seems a pretty intelligent response to me. I doubt he'd have got anywhere with reason or arguing 'his' corner.

im shocked and horrified that adh is so shocked and horrified.

From what I read somewhere, didn't he say that he would give them X minutes, then leave exactly X minutes after he arrived.

Ok, he could have given them a little leeway, but you have to admit that he is punctual.

What was Boris Johnson doing over the weekend before the snow arrived ? Aparantly waiting to "observe that it had started to snow"

Presumably he assumed that the people who work for him and are meant to watch the weather, check and line up the gritters to go in bad weather etc were doing their job properly? Hardly reasonable to expect a head honcho to double check the trucks are heading out on a day to day basis.

I'm not shocked and horrified, I'm having fun 😀

coffeeking - I don't think he assumed anything, they were out and they were doing their job properly ...

Hardly reasonable to expect a head honcho to double check the trucks are heading out on a day to day basis.

Well were this referring to a normal day then I'd say that you'd have a point, however given that this was a "once in twenty year event" that had been forecast well in advance then no I don't think that it's unreasonable to expect a head honcho to actually do something other than look out the window. Whether or not there was actually anything else that could be done is another question. His subsequent behaviour has however been petulant to say the least.

Boris is useless, as I pointed out on this very forum, before the media elected him. Run London? I doubt he could run a bath, without someone to 'advise' him.

Apart from coming up with a couple of populist ideas (a new routemaster (something that Ken was looking at anyway), and a St. George's Day festival), what has he actually done, that Ken's regime haddunt started anyway, that has really benefitted London?

Bugger all, really. He's too busy trying to line his own, and his slimy cronies pockets. Useless Tory Puppet. I can't imagine someone more out of touch with real London and it's people.

Ah well; he'll screw himself up anyway, it's only a matter of time.

Actually, he does have a use; to show people just how out of touch and self-serving the Tories really are.

Red Ken Cha Cha Cha!

Seems a pretty intelligent response to me. I doubt he'd have got anywhere with reason or arguing 'his' corner.

It would have been up to whoever was listening to decide that. This little committee meeting would have gone largely unnoticed had it not been for Boris getting up and walking out when he had run out of answers, intelligent or otherwise.

All he has done is draw the wrong kind of attention to himself and possibly shown people the lack of responsibility he has.

He's too busy trying to line his own, and his slimy cronies pockets.

Whatever happened to all that money that nice man Lee Jasper and chums got their hand on then?

Dunno, Flashy, but he's facing whatever the Law can do him for, I'm sure. And he was actually there for a while, whereas 2 of Boris' mates were sacked after only a couple of weeks, right at the start!

Lee Jasper is a slimy nasty self-serving ****, though. He let Ken and London down. Not Ken's fault though.

Ken did what he thought was best for London. Boris gets told what to do, by Conservative Party Central Office. Who don't give a stuff about most people in London.

Actually I think Boris is so laughable I would be surprised if the Torys were happy to have him in the headlines. I bet Cameron is crapping it every time Boris opens his mouth.

But what acutally depresses me more is the fact that he was voted in. That either means Ken was worse or the public are not fit to vote. Its the latter I reckon.

But, RB, Ken stood by his man. Judge a man by his friends, perhaps? Boris at least ousted people that didn't stack up.

But what acutally depresses me more is the fact that he was voted in. That either means Ken was worse or the public are not fit to vote. Its the latter I reckon.

Oh dear.

Get over it. The corrupt twunt lost because people voted for someone who they wanted to vote for. Do not insult the electorate.

After all, one could have said the very same about Bliar when he was voted in, especially second and third time round. I wouldn't. The majority vote was to Bliar, that does not make the majority of those voters unfit to vote.

I'm no fan of Boris, but this wasn't the issue to tackle him over - as others have said, sometimes the weather is too bad to be worth bothering to cope with. Provided that it is only a rare event, he acted correctly and hasn't wasted money on a blue moon event.

I get the impression that a lot of this was cos it was in the city - I was chatting to a woman the other day who lives in an isolated Peak District village who hadn't been able to use her car for 10 days in the winter snowfall - steep hills, narrow lanes, no gritters or public transport. She hada slightly more laid back attitude about some weather disruption.

He showed support for a colleague, albeit one who let him down. And Ken suspended Jasper, remember? Jasper did at least have a reasonable record before taking up the job. Ray Lewis was blatantly dodgy before he started! Everyone but Boris knew this, of course. Boris had to get rid of him to save further embarrassment.

Don't bother trying to defend Boris. He's a numpty, to put it mildly, and not fit for the job. And you know it.

BRING BACK KEN!

I still dont think the public should be allowed to vote - they vote for reasons that have little to do with running the city / country / economy whatever.

A panel of experts with good track records should choose someone.

Its like seeing the doctory, you seek his advice, you dont tell him what drugs you reckon you should have because they sound good, or the advert was good, or they come in a blue packet or were made in the UK.

What exactly is the problem? He walsked out of a hearing that seemed more intetested in political point scoring than in solving any problems or answering any questions.
Was it because London got caught out by some snow? Ooooh, we can't have the centre of the universe grinding to a halt can we? here in Scotland, it snows. It snows every year, without fail. We have gritters and salt on standby. yet this year, the snow was heavier than usual and some councils were caught out and ran short of salt. It happens. We expect coucils to save money, they do what they can, and that includes holding borderline supplies of salt. Holding supplies of salt and having gritter drivers on standby (paying them wages) costs money. Doubtless, had money been spent stockpiling salt and paying gritter drivers to sit at hme and drink tea Boris the Buffoon would been blamed for wasting money and you would be on here blaming him for the credit crunch.
Moan, moan, moan , moan, whine, complain, moan whine, whinge. London moaning, there's nothing like it.

I'm glad he's not running my town that's for sure - the fact that he actively supported George Ws first Election campaign & then [when we all knew what he was like] supported his re-election - pretty much sums him up for me

The voters of London seem to have got Norman Tebbit in clown’s uniform - I'm not sure if that's what they were expecting or wanting

And actually, as slimy as Jasper may be, he has in fact been cleared of any offence or wrongdoing.

Boris is propperly dodgy, though.

So what should Boris have done ? Part the snow in a Moses red sea stylee ?

whats the betting borris arranges to have the comittee beaten up by one of his posh angry mates.....
[url= http://www.channel4.com//services/videoplayer/popup.jsp?name=Dispatches_BorisAudio ]just a black eye and a bust rib![/url]

Oh dear.

CaptainFlashheart - Member

Judge a man by his friends, perhaps?

Flashy? Care to comment?

😆

Awesomes.

Stupid conversation, utterly stupid. No bones about that. Guppy's an arse as well. However, nothing happened.

Still bloody stupid to have even had that conversation, though. One does question who recorded and leaked it, though.

OK, enough now. For those the like him sit back and enjoy his leadership.

For those that cant stand him, sit back and enjoy his leadership.

Its a win win situation, now, since the sun is shining - get out on your bike and enjoy it while it lasts. You never know, it may start to snow again.

coffeeking - I don't think he assumed anything, they were out and they were doing their job properly ...

Well ... exactly - my point was that he shouldnt be directly responsible anyway and they were suggesting he should; not that people were not doing their job.

You never know, it may start to snow again.

Having just watched the whole 30 minutes leading up to that clip I can see EXACTLY why he got up and walked out- quite frankly the questions coming from the other committee members were pointless and repeated. For the whole 30 minutes before they had asked the same questions, both Boris and the transport commissioner (the guy below boris) said that the teams were out gritting at maximum capability from very early, the commissioner was told by his underlings that *everything that could be done was being done* from as early as the forecasts were given, he had informed Boris of this all along and that boris had no place countermanding the decisions made lower down the chain based on safety. The bunch of buffoons then continued to try to get boris to admit that it was his fault the buses didnt run, that he didn't do enough beforehand and that somehow he should have had a further role in somehow magicking the snow away.

What a stupid committee, I can see exactly why he walked out considering that was the 6th time he had been asked the same question, he wasnt about to answer it again. I dont care about political sides here, the guys asking the questions were retarded. They were suggesting they should be using snowploughs through the city centre, again the transport commissioner pointed out this was a farcical idea due to grit/snow/parked cars mix and blocking pavements and bus-stops. The committee then continued to suggest there was something else they could have done.

There's no wonder it costs ****ing fortune to run the country, it's full of time wasters and totally brain dead morons assuming they should have full alpine snow clearance techniques in place for a once in 25 year snowfall.

Quite right for boris to walk out, showing them the utter disregard they deserved. when he left they then continued to ask the same questions of the commissioner who continued to give the same answer in as many ways as he could trying to get them to understand. Another 30 minutes they waffled on about maybe they should have a complete set of "secondary bus routes" in cases of emergency, why they didnt grit only the bus routes and leave all other routes like of side routes...on and on and on.

ARRRGGGHHHH

[center]I'm with the Captain and Coffeeking on this. AAAAARRRRGggghhhh indeed.

When I'm boss of everything the first to the wall will be the scores of mindlessly and myopically bureaucratic institutions and committees so beloved of 'large government'

Pity Gwynneth Dunwoody isn't still around. Gwynneth V Boris would have been far more interesting. The Transport Committee were crap. 1-0 Boris.

I strongly believe that about ten yrs in power is right for any administration. After that they tend to run out of ideas, stop listening to the people they serve and lose sight of their principles.

Boris was the first really credible candidate put up against Ken - the two factors together got him elected.

Remember folks he is not the clown that he cultivates as an image - he is a very clever chap albeit one with little common sense. At least he is not a dull grey man like too many of our politicians

RudeBoy - Member
Don't bother trying to disagree with Rudeboy. He's a numpty, to put it mildly, and not fit for the job. And you know it.

Personally I reckon the very existence of this thread - and the title used for it - says it all really. What a pathetic point over which to suggest that Boris isn't up to it (he may well not be, but his responses to this committee seem perfectly reasonable given the questions he was being asked). Shouldn't the question be, if Boris had done some of the ridiculous things Gordon has, how stupid would we be saying he was?

Why not just say what you mean, eh, chrism? Don't hold back, like...

Resorting to abuse proves you've lost the argument.

Boris is not fit for the job. Clear for everyone to see. Only a matter of time before he's forced to resign, anyway.

And make way for the Second Coming of Ken.

TJ, I used to have a similar view to you on this one, believing that he is not the clown he appears to be and that behind it all is a very clever guy. Indeed, there is a well read, well educated brain underneath the shock of blond hair (which could be tidier but which he purposely tosses around to appear a little more rakish). [i][b]Some[/b][/i] of his writing is good, albeit the writing for the Telegraph has to be a bit crap to allow for the readership.

Whatever about "...not being good at detail...", he's actually shockingly bad at most of it. I've seen footage of him at mayor's questions before (not just on the documentary) and the disdain with which he treats any questions, not just the difficult ones, shows, in one way, what a bad politician he is. He's too easily led by corrupt friends and accomplices to whom he shows some kind of stupid loyalty, when they lean on him for favours now that he's in the job.

Ah, ****, I could go on, sheesh, I had problems with Ken, but this guy is a joke...an absolute joke. If anything, it shows the kind of stupid things that can happen in elections after an administration has been around too long...like you say.

TandemJeremy - Johnson was [b]not[/b] "the first really credible candidate put up against Ken", Steve Norris was a perfectly credible candidate. In fact in the 2004 London mayoral elections, Steve Norris's share of the vote increased when the Tory vote nationwide decreased. In 2008 Johnson failed to increase the Tory vote in line with the increased support for Tories nationwide.

Far from being a "credible candidate", Johnson was very much seen as a "gimmick/joke candidate", in the same way as the monkey which was elected Mayor of Hartlepool in 2002 was.

By 2006 the Tories had realised that because of Livingstone's huge personal popularity (despite New Labour's very low approval rating) their only chance of defeating him was probably by offering the electorate a gimmick candidate who would distract them from policy issues. Amongst the candidate considered as Tory candidates were DJ Mike Read, shock jock Nick Ferrari, and actor Tom Conti.

Take away his amusing Hammer House of Horror first name, his funny Ken Dodd style hair, his Mr Bean composure, and his endearing 'British romantic comedy film' upper-class pronunciations, and who the hell thinks that Alexander Johnson would have stood a chance of getting elected ?

Some time ago I read a newspaper letter by an American who had been at Oxford with Johnson. He said that he had just witness a performance by Johnson on TV and was shocked to discover that Johnson was [i]still[/i] using the same bumbling eccentric act which he had used whilst debating at the Oxford Union. Well I reckon that the act has served Johnson well - as he goes through life amusing and entertaining people by acting like some sort of upper-class village idiot. It appears to have very effectively hidden from some, the fact that he is actually a totally useless ****. Well done Boris.

Apart from that TJ, where do you get your proof of Johnson's much vaunted "cleverness" ? Is it the fact that he knows words which haven't been used since the 1930s such as 'piccaninny' to describe black people ? Or is it simply that anyone who speaks with plums in their mouths must by definition, be very 'clever' ?

And since when TJ, has there been a 'limited shelf-life' on good policies ? You don't support for a candidate with crap (or non-existing) policies because 'it's time for a change', ffs.

.

On the issue of Transport ........ (btw,Johnson entered the mayoral race very wisely without any policies. However, pressurised to come up with [i]something[/i], he came came up with the 'Routemaster' idea. His most important idea and one which now appears to have absolutely no commitment to keep)

The GLA unlike the old GLC which had extensive responsibilities for issues such as housing and education, really doesn't have much in it's remit at all. By far and away the most it's most important responsibility and the one with the largest budget (£9.2billion) is transport. Indeed one of major arguments put forward for London having a city wide authority was the fact that it was absurd to consider that one of the world's largest capitals should not have a fully integrated transport strategy.

Punters such as crism might well be dismissive of the need to hold the Mayor of London - who has wide powers over TfL, accountable for it's smooth and effective operations, but as a Londoner I strongly disagree.

And to those who share Jonson's clear contempt for the Parliamentary Transport Select Committee, I would point out that most people realise the importance of having a democratically accountable body to keep tabs on the nation's transport infrastructure.

And no anotherdeadhero, I doubt very much that you had stopped to think that this was a cross-party committee before accusing it of attempting to 'make a party political scapegoat' of Johnson.

All Johnson had to do was convince the committee that he had done everything within his power as Mayor of London and chairman of Transport for London, to prepare the nation's capital for a highly predicted period inclement weather. He chose instead to act like a stroppy teenage who had been caught out and make smart-ar5e comments. Although his sum effort was probably indeed as he says, "I observed that it had started to snow."

.

I find it astonishing that whilst everyday punters come on here whingeing about the incompetence and alleged lack of accountability of politicians, so many are prepared to defend one who clearly feels an aversion to be being held accountable. I suspect that in this case he is being defended by some, for no other reason other that the fact that he is a Tory. And as the OP suggests, had he been a member of the Labour Party he would have been strongly denounced.

Also I suspect that like Dan Hannan recent speech, just the simple fact someone is insulting and offensive is hugely appealing. I reckon anyone who wants to study what is wrong with British politics today, should come to STW forum and observe the behaviour of those who reduce politics to the level of a reality TV show, and would probably being prepared to vote for a tabloid-backed Italian porn star with big tits.

Hmmm

I meant clever in that he is often underestimated as not being the dangerous right wing tory twit he actually is - he appears harmless but is dangerous. He is also clever in an academic way I think. High IQ but common sense and nous of a tree stump

I do not agree that Norris was a credible candidate. Totally lacking in charisma and did he not have to be pushed into standing?

Still - its all of little consequence to me being 400 miles away and IMO he can only damage the tories chances in the general election. At least he is not a dull nonentity

It was time for Ken to go. I am sure he will be back tho

Also I suspect that like Dan Hannan recent speech, just the simple fact someone is insulting and offensive is hugely appealing

Absolute nonsense. I've just listened to Hannan's speech again and all I heard was a cogent argument against Brown's public spending policy backed up with some economic statistics. Worst thing he called Brown was that he "sounded like a Breznev era apparatchik". Hardly very insulting or offensive

Hannan's speech was hugely appealing because he told the PM, in a very eloquent manner, exactly what a lot of us British electorate would like to tell him if we got the chance.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree TJ. I think that Steve Norris was indeed a very creditable candidate. He might well have 'lacked charisma' but since when should elections be decided on the basis of which candidate has the most charisma ? Despite his alleged lack charisma, I have no doubt that Norris would have been a much more competent and credible mayor than Johnson.

Certainly there is no doubt that he would not have appeared before the House of Commons Transport Committee and acted like some sort of prima donna playing to the gallery and staged a childish walk out.

More likely instead, he would have given a detailed account of the measures which he had taken as Mayor and Chairman of Transport for London to deal with the fully predicted chaos which was caused by the severe weather conditions.

Then maybe, the Transport Committee could perhaps have recommended central government provides more funds to cover the costs of necessary equipment - if this had be found to be wanting. Or maybe they could have recommended that the mayor be given enhanced powers to co-ordinate gritting resources between boroughs so that those that excess capacity could help those in particular difficulties ? Or maybe simply accepted that the Mayor had done everything which could have been reasonably expected of him.

However we will never know exactly what the Mayor of London and chairman of the Transport did in preparation other than "observing than it had started to snow", because the bumbling incompetent fukkwit, has all the credibility of the Hartlepool monkey and is more interested in nurturing his 'charisma' by acting like some sort of drama queen, than serving the needs of Londoners.

.

uponthedowns - Hannan's video became a YouTube chart-breaking sensation and unique Internet phenomenon, not because his 3 minute speech was an in-depth economic critique, but because it was perceived to have been rude, insulting, and offensive, to the British prime minister before a large assembly consisting of European politicians.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree TJ. I think that Steve Norris was indeed a very creditable candidate.

I bow to your knowledge. Its an awful long way from me and not very important so I don't pay that much attention to your funny little provincial mayor contests 😉

Resorting to abuse proves you've lost the argument.

FWIW I'm not at all a fan of Boris holding high political office, just think this is rather a pathetic point to have a go at him about. Yes he should make sure London's transport works, but isn't it rather more important that it works on the other 1460 days of his term than on one day of freak weather - should they really be spending a disproportionate amount of money on coping with such conditions once every 15 years?

I suspect that in this case he is being defended by some, for no other reason other that the fact that he is a Tory. And as the OP suggests, had he been a member of the Labour Party he would have been strongly denounced.

I think that Steve Norris was indeed a very creditable candidate. He might well have 'lacked charisma' but since when should elections be decided on the basis of which candidate has the most charisma ?

Abuse? Oh, you mean your abuse which I quoted back at you

No, you called me a numpty. I called Boris a numpty; I din't aim the comment directly at anyone on this forum.

I am very, very upset by that. Being called a 'numpty' is quite possibly the worst insult I can imagine.

😥

I'm so upset, I'm going to wear my pants inside out.

And build a little shrine to the Great Roy Hudd.

[img] [/img]

In my experience of emergency planning - its normal for plans for all likely scenarios to be prepared well in advance, and regularly dusted off and updated.

Then, when an event occurs, the prepared plan is pulled from the file and used.

Now, on that basis, the people who you would be looking for answers from would be those who were responsible for drafting and keeping those plans, and I'd be willing to bet they were appointed under a certain Newt fancier!

Funny also that the "usual suspects" are keen to blame Boris for something that happened when he's been in office for a matter of months, when they are still offloading the blame for half the UK's current problems on the prime minister before the prime minister before last!

Funny also that the "usual suspects" are keen to blame Boris for something that happened when he's been in office for a matter of months

I have to confess not reading this thread [i]that[/i] intently Ratty, but who's been blaming 'Boris' for "something that happened when he's been in office for a matter of months" ?

As far as I can see, he has been accused only of not fully cooperating with the Transport Select Committee.

And since [i]apparently[/i] the explanation why things went tits up is so easily explained Ratty, why didn't he put it to the Transport Select Committee, whilst simultaneously pointing out that he had worked his bollox off trying to rectify to problems.

Or was his sum input indeed as he puts it : "I observed that it had started to snow."

.

BTW - the article reports :

"[i]Mr Johnson said "huge effort and huge preparations" had been made to grit roads but snow had fallen on the grit and the compacted snow had made conditions even more difficult.[/i]"

In my area no attempts at all where made to grit bus routes before the snow fell - even the ones going through Central Croydon. In fact many bus routes were still not gritted days [i]after[/i] the snow had fallen.

I have no idea at all if Johnson is to blame for this failure, but obviously someone is ****ing responsible.

In my area no attempts at all where made to grit bus routes before the snow fell

Same here,and indeed just about everywhere in London.

Boris is Mayor, and in charge of transport stuff. It was ultimately his responsibility. The buck stops with him.

His response to criticism is both childish and unprofessional. He is quite clearly unable to actually cope with the task in hand, and almost entirely reliant on advisers, and orders from Tory party HQ.

Useless. My mate's mate Boris, what has been inside for all sorts of petty crimes, would do a better job. And you woon't trust him with a duvet.

gg,

Am I not right in thinking that the Monkey got re-elected? Also, that the head of TfL had answered questions just prior to Boris? In fact it seemed to me that one of the reasons that Boris was getting exasperated was that the committee were asking him questions that had previously been answered by the TfL guy, no? Also, do non of these Transport Committee types listen to the news - there were council officials from all over the place explaining why they CHOOSE not to have enough snow ploughs or grit to cope with 1 in 20 year weather events - it's not cost effective. Come on, get real, most people seemed to enjoy a couple of days off to have fun in the snow.

When Red Ken was in power I remember having to walk home 5 miles in the snow as chaos insued after snowfalls stopped ALL public transport- those werent the worst in 18yrs but funny how everyone forgets Ken's **** up then.

Funnily- I walked the 5miles with little difficulty as did everyone else.

Just out of interest - why TF should Johnson be held accountable by MPs of any persuasion?

London has devolved powers. The Mayor of London is directly elected by London voters, and whether he does a good job is for the London Assembly (to exercise oversight) and for the voters (to re-elect or sack him as appropriate). AFAICS, if he shows up for a committee of MPs, he's doing them a favour, not because he should be under any obligation.

(Not that he isn't a total tool).

Rudeboy "Britain did, it could be argued, need it's own 9-11. And it got one."

Is this the same rudeboy posting on here that thinks London should be bombed get back to the other thread and defend yourself for the above.

Rudeboy "Britain did, it could be argued, need it's own 9-11. And it got one."

If you did, a public apology is the least you could do.

Yes he did! I still cannot believe I read it.

Just out of interest - why TF should Johnson be held accountable by MPs of any persuasion?

Well I'll tell you konabunny - but only because you said you were interested.

It is normal in an advanced country for the state to ensure that there is a fully integrated transport infrastructure, including unsurprisingly, the capital city.

"It is normal in an advanced country for the state to ensure that there is a fully integrated transport infrastructure, including unsurprisingly, the capital city. "

That may be in the state's interest, but it's not the UK parliament's responsibility to do that - it's a devolved power. The part of the state that's responsible for that is the GLC. 😉

You just don't get it do you konabunny ? The transport infrastructure, including the infrastructure in London, affects potentially [b]everyone[/b]. Not only those who vote in the London mayoral elections.

When the snow brought chaos to London, the roads with commuter traffic coming into Croydon came to a complete standstill, for days. All the traffic trying to get out to Gatwick airport also came to a standstill, for days. I could go on but I'm sure that you get the picture.

The chaos effected the lives of thousands, if not millions of people who have no vote at all in the mayoral elections. A fair few I dare say, were undoubtedly not even British residents. Johnson isn't answerable to them. And I completely fail to see the problem with him being answerable to the Transport Select Committee who's role amongst other things, is the smooth and effective operation of the nation's transport infrastructure.

Unless of course, 'Boris' is a [i]very[/i] special person.

All the traffic trying to get out to Gatwick airport also came to a standstill, for days.

Define "days" for me, GG,

Three.

Was due to start on a new site, couldn't get to work on monday and tuesday, was told that the work might be given to someone else if I didn't go in on wednesday, so I gave it a bash. Took me four hours to get from Croydon to Crawley (just next to Gatwick) it normally takes three quarters of an hour. Most of the time took getting out of Croydon onto the M23 - over three hours. And most of that time, was spent at not moving. All because of the snow. I will admit that Croydon was exceptionally badly hit - we had two major roads (on hills) still shut because of snow over a week after the snow had fallen.

"The chaos effected the lives of thousands, if not millions of people who have no vote at all in the mayoral elections. "

No, I get it, keep your hair on.

That's as may be - but you are affected by plenty of things every day about which you have no say. Just because Britian is affected by the US sub-prime mortgage industry, it's not the place of MPs to start grilling US financial institutions, however much they enjoy the opportunity to act tough and score points.

London transport is London's responsibility, and it's not the place of MPs from Northumberland or Ebbw Vale or even Maidstone to stick their nose in it - any more than it's Boris Johnson's job to exercise oversight over the UK Department of Transport (or whatever it's called now).

it's not the place of MPs to start grilling US financial institutions,

Erm.... n o ....... you're quite right - [b]well done ![/b] 😀

It is however, the job of the Transport Select Committee, if they so wish, to grill the Mayor of London.

Select committees have the power to "send for persons, papers and records".

The Transport Select Committee has in it's remit unsurprisingly, "transport". Johnson is chairman of Transport for London. For the Transport Select Committee to request that the chairman of Transport for London appear before them, is completely appropriate.

Get it now ? No ? Well too bad ....... I really don't think I can make it any clearer than that 😐

Took me four hours to get from Croydon to Crawley (just next to Gatwick) it normally takes three quarters of an hour.

Whilst it obviously wasn't good in Croydon, I doubt that your very local conditions particularly affected many non-Londoners.

grizzlygus - you can ramble on and miss the point all you want (in your glee at Johnson looking foolish - which is always a good thing but never a rare one), but all the same it's not UK politicians' mandate or interest to interfere with transport in London when that's a power reserved for London government, and it's undemocratic to do so. BJ doesn't answer to MPs, he's supposed to answer to the London Ass'y and London electorate. It was the same when Labour controlled the GLC under a Tory government, and it's the same the other way around.

We may just have to agree to let this drop, as this is so incredibly obvious and tedious.

Bottom line on Boris is that he's some higher powers punishment on the British for laughing when the USA elected George W.

So it wasn't actually at a complete standstill for days?

Yes it was.

What bit of, "I spent more time sitting in my car not moving, than moving" don't you understand ?

I am fully aware of the fact that the roads around Gatwick were relatively free, as indeed they were in Crawley. Crawley got comparatively very little snow. The M23 was hardly affected by the snow.

Croydon however, was very badly affected. Some roads in Croydon were still impassable [i]days[/i] after the snow fell, bringing traffic to a standstill.

By all means express your learned opinion about whether the chairman of Transport for London should appear before the House of Commons Select Committee on Transport, but don't tell me what the driving conditions in Croydon were like. I know what ****ing snow looks like, and I know when a car isn't moving forward.

Please don't p1ss down my back and tell me it's raining ......... I might be a ****, but I'm not a [i]complete[/i] ****.

What bit of, "I spent more time sitting in my car not moving, than moving" don't you understand ?

don't tell me what the driving conditions in Croydon were like.

I do wonder what it is you expected them to do that they didn't. If it was just the gritting, would that actually have helped a lot given the amount of snow you actually had?

[img] [/img]