Jump to content

Recommended Posts

pk Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If you?re not aware of the situation inherited why

> are you so quick to allocate blame?



As I said, provide proof before defending your position but the link below is from the current mayors first year in office

http://content.tfl.gov.uk/tfl-annual-report-and-statement-of-accounts-2016-17.pdf


I'm no accountant but the finances are shown from page 104 onwards so if someone can work it out then good luck although at the time it showed cash in the bank 🤐

Many people are still, understandably, reluctant to use public transport, which makes it costly or impossible to go into the congestion zone either for necessity or recreation, cyclists excepted. This has to impact negatively on businesses in the zone.

Spartacus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> pk Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > If you?re not aware of the situation inherited

> why

> > are you so quick to allocate blame?

>

>

> As I said, provide proof before defending your

> position but the link below is from the current

> mayors first year in office

> http://content.tfl.gov.uk/tfl-annual-report-and-st

> atement-of-accounts-2016-17.pdf

>

> I'm no accountant but the finances are shown from

> page 104 onwards so if someone can work it out

> then good luck although at the time it showed cash

> in the bank 🤐


So in short, you?ve said it?s obviously this mayor?s fault


But actually you haven?t a clue

2016/17 accounts are out of date.


TFL had a business plan which would have delivered a surplus in 2022/23.


They have no control over the mayoral pledge to freeze fares but have delivered with this challenge and the challenge of removal of government grant.


Fares will now rise and those using cars instead of public transport will pay extra.


Capital investment will continue, as it should and Crossrail, well...how the government haven't pounced on that epic failure instead is beyond me.

pk Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Spartacus Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > pk Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > If you?re not aware of the situation

> inherited

> > why

> > > are you so quick to allocate blame?

> >

> >

> > As I said, provide proof before defending your

> > position but the link below is from the current

> > mayors first year in office

> >

> http://content.tfl.gov.uk/tfl-annual-report-and-st

>

> > atement-of-accounts-2016-17.pdf

> >

> > I'm no accountant but the finances are shown

> from

> > page 104 onwards so if someone can work it out

> > then good luck although at the time it showed

> cash

> > in the bank 🤐

>

> So in short, you?ve said it?s obviously this

> mayor?s fault

>

> But actually you haven?t a clue


Interesting debating style PK

You asked for evidence of TfLs finances and I provided their accounts from 2016/17 so that a conclusion could be drawn if the previous mayor left them up s41t creek with out a paddle (as I said I'm not an accountant but from what I read he didn't)

As a result you try to debunk my views without providing any evidence to the contrary.


But to answer your point, yes in my personal opinion the current mayor has failed to deliver on a number of areas under his remit (not just TfL) and if London was a private company he would have been removed from power by now and replaced. But that's just my view and others have different views.


Jules I agree the accounts are out if date but as pointed out above they were there to show where this mayor was a year into his role.


I would be interested to see the prediction document showing an operational surplus in 2 years as it was recognised a couple of years ago that revenue from fares were falling yet TfLs predictions were working on income from fares remaining the same at the time. I have also seen that the prediction for fares from the new crossrail line seemed to magically reverse this trend.


As always a prediction is only proved right in hindsight which means with creative accounting one could predict anything but until a surplus is actually delivered, it's just that "a prediction" and in the case of crossrail the predicted passenger numbers are in my opinion very questionable.


The document below shows (as well as concerns about TfLs financial position and recommendations) how much revenue the Elizabeth line was expected to raise, but with the delays the predicted surplus may well also be delayed.


https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/tfl_finances_-_final.pdf

Perhaps there should have been more checks that people using buses are using their oyster cards etc. On a short journey from Plough to Goose Green - I witnessed around 10 people of different ages just boarding the bus without presenting their card. Maximum passengers on buses (double decker's) is 30 so one third of passengers not paying. Multiply this by all the bus routes - still amounts to millions lost over a period of time.

300 conductors on the new routemasters were terminated in 2016 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36764417

They were employed to run the new fleet and more were supposed to be rolled out as more routemasters were introduced.


Fact checked and proven PeckhamPam

Crossrail, well...how the government haven't pounced on that epic failure instead is beyond me.


Because that has been in the pipeline for decades through successive Conservative and Labour Governments and all the London Mayors.


https://www.crossrail.co.uk/route/crossrail-from-its-early-beginnings


Also, Boris was the one who was proudly posing with a shovel as the first actual building work started so I doubt he wants too much to do with any sort of inquiry into it...


TfL just run the thing (or they will when it actually opens). Any massive infrastructure build is a consortium of public and private investment, there's simply no other way to finance it. It might be overbudget and late but at least there's something tangible at the end of it, not like a Boris Garden Bridge (finally abandoned by Khan as soon as he became Mayor but with ?43m of public money wasted, thanks Boris).


There's a theme with Boris and his white elephant plans like Island Airports and the Docklands cable car.

The Docklands Cablecar that doesn't go anywhere useful...


Apparently there's a car park and mini Tesco on the north side of the river you can go to.


Maybe it is Boris personal involvement in it that allows it to continue without scrutiny. He does have a record....

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • A quick update - my InPost parcels are being accepted sporadically at Barry's, but only one at a time and every few days, after many refusals - one was refused SEVEN times over about ten days - and several phone calls. As a comparison, I had a message from Yodel that a parcel that was going to Barry's is being delivered to another nearby store, which is interesting...
    • The "Community Benefits" are documented on P12-16 of the Consultation Document. Basically unsubstantiated estimates that it benefits local businesses, claims that it provides "opportunities" for local food traders, businesses & people (the term "opportunities" being meaningless - I have opportunities to win the lottery) without any details, facts or figures, and discounted tickets for local residents (which unsurprisingly seldom sell out). The only direct financial benefit to the Park is a £1000 "Biodiversity Fund" and an undisclosed amount for an "Environmental Impact Fee" - looking at how it was spent this year (flower beds in the playground & Sexby garden) I suspect it would be a similarly small figure. The actual site hire fee - claimed as "commercially sensitive" and therefore undisclosed - is spent on: • Funding the council’s free events programme and Cultural Celebrations Fund • Subsidised fees for community events in the borough • Off-setting the running costs of the Events service, which supports the delivery of the free community events programme  Again, no details given, just vague concepts - can anyone name any of these free & subsidised community events? Or what the "Cultural Celebrations Fund" is or does? It doesn't really sound like any of it is worth  the disturbance, restrictions, noise, litter, environmental damage and negative impact on wildlife in our Park.  
    • The organisers must have spent a fortune on the display..imagine how p**s*d off they must have been!!!! Blink and you missed it kind of thing
    • We also recommend Aaron.  Very reliable, reasonably priced and did a fantastic job on our hallway and bedroom ceiling.  A pleasure to work with and left the house very tidy at the end of the job.  Thank you 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...