Snipe - The Scoop

Tuesday, 13 January 2009

The London Paper scrutinise Mayor Boris Johnson

A new report by the London Assembly reveals that London's finances are now under significant and increasing strain. 

The oncoming recession and millions of pounds worth of cuts brought in by the new mayor means that there are now threats to the financing of our police force, fire safety and transport infrastructure.

According to the report 2009 could be:

"the worst year for London since the 1970's."

But before you go heading for your bunker, just be thankful that Rupert Murdoch's London Paper has got it's finger on the pulse:

"SCRUFFY Boris Johnson has been bombarded with gifts which suggest people want him to smarten up his image.

"The Mayor, notorious for his dishevelled suits and blond mop, has received a series of presents since coming to office, including 12 ties, a box of soap and some silver cufflinks.

"The list of his ‘freebies’ from July to December shows he also received two pairs of new shoes and some posh Gold Hunter wellies to help him keep his look intact in even the worst weather conditions.

"The GQ Man of the Year Prize winner, 44, was also presented with some face cream and a bottle of 1980s aftershave Aramis.

"However, how a cowboy hat - one of the more bizarre gifts on the list - can help him improve his image is in some doubt.

"A City Hall insider said: “Perhaps people are trying to tell him something…”

Go back to bed London, your government is in control...

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

All newspapers leave you with dirty fingers Only the london paper leaves you with a dirty soul.

AdamB said...

Ooh that's deep. Is that their new slogan?

Anonymous said...

Planet Earth is on a gap year in 2009 – not a lot Johnson can do about that, or its economic effects on his wonderful city.

“TfL is facing the risk of a significant shortfall in fare income” – read: too many empty buses clogging up the roads.

“The organisation is already experiencing lower than planned growth in passenger journeys - the increase in passenger journeys in 2008/09 is less than half what TfL had planned for.” – read: TfL’s figures are bullshit.

Question: aren’t those the figures you were using to support your case for the articulated baloney buses – n’est-ce pas?

AofE

AdamB said...

“TfL is facing the risk of a significant shortfall in fare income” – read: too many empty buses clogging up the roads."

Or alternatively read the report (admittedly it's not yet up on the GLA website so I'll help you out)

"TfL’s assumption of income from fares in 2009/10 was set before the
economic downturn. It assumes an increase of 8.5 per cent in income
compared with this year.This is made up of a fares rise of 6 per cent
(RPI plus 1 per cent based on the July 2008 RPI) and an increase in
demand of 2.5 per cent. TfL figures in the current year show reduced
growth in demand over plan. Although passenger numbers continue
to increase, the rate of increase has slowed and by December 2008
this had fallen to around 1 per cent, 1.5 per cent less than the
assumed level of growth in 2009/10 to balance the draft budget."

Tube fares are known as the canaries in the mines of a recession and so will probably be the first to go down. The assembly urge TfL to revise their figures accordingly (based on a drop to tube rather than bus ridership) Bus ridership figures are expected to mostly hold up and past experience shows that they are much closer related to population than to the economic climate. So when you ask:

"Question: aren’t those the figures you were using to support your case for the articulated baloney buses – n’est-ce pas?"

I answer non.

Anonymous said...

"I answer non."

I love it when you talk dirty with me.

I look forward to reading the report.

Tom said...

Actually, Mr. Arse over Elbow, the bendy bus policy is even dafter in these circumstances, since Boris is choosing to provide equivalent capacity at more cost. This is therefore a pre-recession policy (dating from 2005, remember) being plowed ahead with regardless for reasons that have nothing to with either transport or finance. If there truly are few enough passengers to change bus types (which from evidence the other day there aren't) then you'd expect him to say 'well, we don't need all this capacity'.

So nuts to you.

Anonymous said...

Tommy Boy, you write like someone recovering from a head injury. Take more time...over your words and ideas, and stuff.

"...then you'd expect him to say 'well, we don't need all this capacity'"

Plans can be revisited and revised. Reduced and changing capa requirements is an argument for smaller and more flexible capa units, i.e. not baloney buses.

AOE

AdamB said...

What is it about you and baloney?

And what exactly is 'small and flexible' about the next generation Routemasters?